Quote:We need to get over this fear of the court.

That's how courts work. In RL, most civil cases never go to court. They're almost always resolved before going to court because of a fear of its institutional majesty, the resources needed to pursue a defense or prosecution, and the uncertainty of results. 

The same fear of the court exists in NS and will always exist. 

Yeah, Unibot the "settlement outside of court" that occurred in the Belschaft situation worked out really well. Are out of court settlements even legally binding?

What I like about the courts is that they are public.

No, I'm not going to get involved because the government at the time decided not to pursue the case. I agreed with their decision at the time and don't see any new information in the case that warrants it months later, besides petty personal feuds.

I'm not defending what Bels did, and you can read my posts about what I thought about what he did when it happened.

(02-09-2015, 01:05 PM)Escade Wrote: And GR and Unibot, although I understand your perspective - no one likes to be in court and our court systems have lain fallow for quite some time. However, if you really feel that courts are used to intimidate people into backing off then this trial will be a perfect example of what is or isn't defamation and to what extent the courts will interfere in such things.

I have no intention of motioning this to vote myself. I'm confident that Belschaft has no case, and I have a clear conflict of interests. However, I do believe that Farengeto's reasoning is wrong, and that it is actually wrong to sit on this just because a trial is pending. We've been discussing the appropriateness of defamation as a crime for weeks, if not longer.

Anyways, just one last thing. To characterize my support for repeal as opportunistic and self-serving -- which I think some people here are doing -- is unfair. I've supported repealing defamation or making it much less ambiguous literally since the Code of Laws was passed in the last Great Council.

(02-09-2015, 02:09 PM)Sandaoguo Wrote:

(02-09-2015, 01:05 PM)Escade Wrote: And GR and Unibot, although I understand your perspective - no one likes to be in court and our court systems have lain fallow for quite some time. However, if you really feel that courts are used to intimidate people into backing off then this trial will be a perfect example of what is or isn't defamation and to what extent the courts will interfere in such things.

I have no intention of motioning this to vote myself. I'm confident that Belschaft has no case, and I have a clear conflict of interests. However, I do believe that Farengeto's reasoning is wrong, and that it is actually wrong to sit on this just because a trial is pending. We've been discussing the appropriateness of defamation as a crime for weeks, if not longer.

Anyways, just one last thing. To characterize my support for repeal as opportunistic and self-serving -- which I think some people here are doing -- is unfair. I've supported repealing defamation or making it much less ambiguous literally since the Code of Laws was passed in the last Great Council.

I'm not questioning the approriatenesd of the proposal itself (which for obvious reasons I will not state my opinion on), merely the highly questionable nature of the accused attempting to repeal their charges regardless of the circumstance.

I am more than willing to let this go to vote, but only after any pending defamation cases are resolved.

(02-09-2015, 01:33 PM)southern bellz Wrote: No, I'm not going to get involved because the government at the time decided not to pursue the case. I agreed with their decision at the time and don't see any new information in the case that warrants it months later, besides petty personal feuds.

I'm not defending what Bels did, and you can read my posts about what I thought about what he did when it happened.

Ok, in case you missed it SB. Belschaft alleged that CSS members were involved in his original plot\conspiracy. And then he also claimed he never did anything at all. And the he ran for two government positions (MoA and Justice).

From what I see in the original thread and what the government mentioned the agreement was that Belschaft would go into a self-imposed exile and not run for government, etc and show remorse for his actions. That is not what happened.

I'll look over for your comments in that thread as well to get a sense of where you're at.

I am going to say that if it had been Unibot who had been caught in this kind of conspiracy, the reaction by many people would be a 360 degree opposite.

Unibot & GR, you're both brilliant people with a lot of practice with legal stuff and legislation, and you should actually promote this case in the international community (see the original thread about the Belschaft situation and also what many people are saying). TSP can be an example of the right way to do things.

Honestly, there are people who play this game to enjoy it and on my part participate in a political process that builds community and regional events. Most of my goals have been the decentralization of power from the hands of the few and more encouragement of new people to try out things.

Then there are people who play this game to harm others, get rid of political enemies, backstab and just act in unethical ways. I think some regions may encourage this and be know for this but TSP is honorable and good. We like drama but not the destructive kind. It's time to really refashion the region into a safe place where people build, agree to disagree but don't take actions or do things meant to circumvent democracy or the people's voices.

There was no agreement of any kind Eescade.

(02-09-2015, 02:35 PM)Escade Wrote: Unibot & GR, you're both brilliant people with a lot of practice with legal stuff and legislation, and you should actually promote this case in the international community (see the original thread about the Belschaft situation and also what many people are saying). TSP can be an example of the right way to do things.

Please don't.

Can you accept the fact that not everyone feels as activist about this as you, and that we actually have no need to turn this into an interregional news and judicial event?

--

Let me ask you this. You have created a controversy around Belschaft. You have made it clear that you plan to file charges against Belschaft. We know, we got it. What else do you want? Why do you keep posting and pushing people to do this or that, instead of simply waiting until the Court is ready and filing your charges. I mean, this really is getting old, and you are becoming precisely the kind of person that you are accusing Belschaft of being.

I have created a controversy? I filed a case against several people in this thread? I don't need to create anything, you trying to play a victim card won't work.

If you think the international community isn't involved in one way or another, you'll be surprised.

What I see here is you suppressing my rights to free speech. Let me ask you what do you want from me? Be honest and be specific because I think what you'd like is that I not pursue this.

I have no interest in speaking to you about this issue since you have a COI. Also speak on your behalf, not on the behalf of others in this thread. Or name names.

As for the comment about Belschaft, please be clear and precise. In what way are we similar? Have I tried to import votes or commit treason?

I am tired of him trying to exclude people from this region. I left once because I was tired of defending people from his machinations. I've come back fully prepared to make sure it stops without the complicit condoning of people like you.
When you only speak to take one side publicly, well well well that is who you truly are.

(02-09-2015, 04:13 PM)Escade Wrote: I have created a controversy? I filed a case against several people in this thread? I don't need to create anything, you trying to play a victim card won't work.

Yes. The very existence and continuation of the other thread, beyond the post where you said you were pursuing charges, is evidence of that.

(02-09-2015, 04:13 PM)Escade Wrote: If you think the international community isn't involved in one way or another, you'll be surprised.

What the interregional community thinks of this is irrelevant. Why we should get them involved is beyond me.

(02-09-2015, 04:13 PM)Escade Wrote: What I see here is you suppressing my rights to free speech. Let me ask you what do you want from me? Be honest and be specific because I think what you'd like is that I not pursue this.

If I really wanted to suppress your right to free speech, I would lock all your threads and suspend your ability to post on this forum. I actually could do that, since I have moderation and admin powers. I don't, because that would be illegal, and abuse of power, and because I have no intention of suppressing anyone's rights.

(02-09-2015, 04:13 PM)Escade Wrote: I have no interest in speaking to you about this issue since you have a COI. Also speak on your behalf, not on the behalf of others in this thread. Or name names.

I have absolutely no idea what on earth you meant with this. Seriously.

(02-09-2015, 04:13 PM)Escade Wrote: As for the comment about Belschaft, please be clear and precise. In what way are we similar? Have I tried to import votes or commit treason?

The only thing you have done since coming back to this region is complaining about Belschaft and trying to intimidate people who oppose your actions, accusing them of being on the side of the "oppressor" or not being willing to speak up for the weak. That is exactly what you have accused Belschaft of doing in the past.

(02-09-2015, 04:13 PM)Escade Wrote: I am tired of him trying to exclude people from this region. I left once because I was tired of defending people from his machinations. I've come back fully prepared to make sure it stops without the complicit condoning of people like you.
When you only speak to take one side publicly, well well well that is who you truly are.

I will say this once more. I am opposing what you do because you are turning this into a circus, and hide behind the excuse of being a defender of the people. People take you to take it easy and at least wait until the Court is actually ready. You ignore that and continue rallying people in your other thread. You start claiming that people should not have a trial if they have confessed. You accuse your opponents of not being on the side of the people. You have no done a single positive thing since you came back to political activity in this region.

You want to know on whose side I am. I am on the side of the law, which says that the only way to deal with individuals who break it is through the proper institutions, following the procedures set in our Charter and Code of Laws. The rule of law is here precisely to protect people from violations to their rights, not matter how egregious or widely known their crimes might be.