arghbrgl

(04-16-2018, 01:08 PM)Belschaft Wrote: I believe you have misunderstood Kris' ruling in HCLQ1708; all residents of TSP are not to be considered members of the coalition, but most are.

Correct. What I said doesn't contradict that.

(04-16-2018, 01:08 PM)Belschaft Wrote: Glen's distinction between Legislators and non-Legislators, and his grant of civil rights (ie; right of appeal) to the first but not the second, is contrary to precedent and law. Members and non-members is the correct, and legal, distinction that must be made.

While it's perfectly legal to draft legislation differentiating between Legislators and non-Legislators (our laws are full of them), for the purposes of the BoR, the distinction must be between member and non-member as per HCLQ1708 - so, you are correct.

Glen also agrees with this, though in somewhat of an obtuse way:

(04-16-2018, 01:18 PM)sandaoguo Wrote: @Bel: I think you’re caught up on an issue that doesn’t actually exist. “Non-legislator” = foreigner. If that needs to be edited, fine. But at the end of the day, merely parking a nation in TSP doesn’t make somebody a TSPer and grant them special rights. That’s ridiculous.

To take my last example, if the Cabinet was preparing to PNG the Queen of Balder, and she created a nation and put it in TSP, that doesn’t suddenly make her a TSPer. That’s an absurd idea that would be abused by (and HAS BEEN prior to Kris’s ruling) enemies and aggressors.

Ignoring the "non-legislator = foreigner" line, this is pretty much saying that the differentiation should be between members and non-members as per HCLQ1708.

TL;DR you two agree in the most disagreeable way possible, as usual (though, honestly, Glen could have been a bit clearer imho)