Cabinet masking has nothing to do with Cabinet membership, and in fact both have been different, according to past precedent. Like Glen explained, there have been instances of Ministers losing access to the Office, or having limited access to it.

(03-31-2015, 11:14 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote: Cabinet masking has nothing to do with Cabinet membership, and in fact both have been different, according to past precedent. Like Glen explained, there have been instances of Ministers losing access to the Office, or having limited access to it.

You're absolutely right, Kris, which proves my point entirely.

Just like Cabinet Masking doesn't mean Cabinet membership, having Citizen Masking doesn't always mean you have citizenship.

You have proven my point beautifully.

No. Citizen mask is how Administrators indicate that a new citizen has passed the security check. Cabinet mask is simply an indicator of the certification that the Election Commissioner has already provided. Your examples are not equivalent.

And once again you're arguing semantics to avoid the fact that you can be in the position, officially, and lack the proper masking. True with both Citizens and Cabinet members.

Masking doesn't equal position and the Admin doesn't always mask people correctly, sometimes in direct contradiction of what the law explicitly states. However, nothing in the law states that a person's position or citizenship is derived from what their masking is.

You keep ignoring the fact that passage of the security is accompanied by immediate masking, meaning that, in the context of citizenship, masking does identify the holding of citizenship. Masking is the indicator. That is not the case with Cabinet masking, because the indicator comes in the form of the Election Commissioner's posting of election results.

In other words, Wolf, our laws state that elections determine who is a Cabinet member. Similarly, our laws state that citizenship is conferred upon successful passing of a security evaluation, the whole point of which is to determine if there are security issues with giving an applicant citizen masking.

The law also states:

8. Citizenship will be removed if a nation has not logged into the South Pacific forums for more than 30 days and made two posts within that period.

The majority of the Admin team has refused to do this by their own admission, as seen here, this has left Tsu and Tsu alone to remask all members who are in violation of this law.

Since Tsu is doing the job of three people all by themselves, an unfair burden placed upon him by the two other Admins, masking can not always be kept accurate in accordance with the law, thus leaving instances where non-citizens are incorrectly masked as citizens.

So Masking ≠ Citizenship.

I know there are high stress things but spring break helps put things in perspective. Can we calm down and stop attacking the admins?

I think I already stated that during my VDship it was my task to mask citizens. I had the authority to do it. Sometimes I forgot to click "Apply" or whatever it was and people didn't get masked and then Kris would let me know that I had made a mistake. I don't think the law states that Admin should do it but considering that VDs since 11/2014 have not been doing their end of the job (compiling the citizen list) we have an issue here on who should do it and when.

Moving the conversation to a productive manner of who should take on this task and how, rather then finding ways to attack the admins would be best here.

(04-01-2015, 06:44 PM)Escade Wrote: Can we calm down and stop attacking the admins?

No one is attacking the Admins, unless citing their own words that they themselves posted counts as "attacking".

(04-01-2015, 06:44 PM)Escade Wrote: I think I already stated that during my VDship it was my task to mask citizens. I had the authority to do it. Sometimes I forgot to click "Apply" or whatever it was and people didn't get masked and then Kris would let me know that I had made a mistake. I don't think the law states that Admin should do it but considering that VDs since 11/2014 have not been doing their end of the job (compiling the citizen list) we have an issue here on who should do it and when.

Yes, Escade, I agree with you.

I've been arguing from the very start that citizenship masks can be applied incorrectly, both in the cases of citizens not receiving a mask and non-citizens possessing a citizen mask. Two of the Admins have been viciously arguing that since Admin does the security checks, this can never be the case.

You have just proved that this can absolutely be the case, and that Citizenship is not dependent on masking and that masking alone isn't the sole indicator of citizenship.

Very well said.

Security checks and masking are two different things, Wolf. If you could tone down the sharpness and offer some sort of solution in the legislation that would be far more helpful. The admins may talk about things since VDs stopped giving two cents about the job they were supposed to do. So if the admins were taking on the tasks that someone was actually elected to do then they've been doing people a favor.

Of course, mistakes in masking can happen. However, again the mentality of "string them up the noose" is very vitrolic and needs to stop.

Again, I'm waiting for the Court to respond and give them a chance to have a say but I also think we need to look at the charter and codes and offer some clarifications.