| Assembly Resolution |
MoFA has jurisdiction over foreign updates. MoRA has jurisdiction over roleplays. They do have the authority to discuss with admins how to organise those sections.
Admins oversee elections, so they have the authority to organise election areas. You are the only one who is making forum administration a political matter. Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator. I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum. Legal Resources: THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System (11-11-2014, 06:22 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote: MoFA has jurisdiction over foreign updates. MoRA has jurisdiction over roleplays. They do have the authority to discuss with admins how to organise those sections. All three admins are planning to run in this election; GB has been nominated as EC. Quote:You are the only one who is making forum administration a political matter. Forum administration is inherently a political matter and always has been and always will be. The decision, for example, to use the organisation of forums to discourage behavior that the admins feel is "detrimental to the community" is a political decision - it's circumventing public policy to make its own public policy and its own judgement over the merit of early campaigning.
While I see the points Unibot is bringing up, I must, fundamentally, disagree, that said, some valid points are mentioned.
As someone who's been doing this for years, on a whole matter of forums and websites, NS is a unique environment; The whole point of the game is politics, and so, while elsewhere the forum administration does (and should) have total jurisdiction over the forum, here, however, it is different. As the forum is essential to the operation of the community, rather than a medium to discuss issues pertaining to the communities common goals (usually a game or other type of thing), a community in NS is built around its forum. That said, the forum administration should remain independent of the government. It's the most effective way to handle it, always has been, and most likely always will be. I like to see the forum as a medium for the community to use, while the government, users, ect, are part of that community. That means the forum administration should answer to the community, and the community should answer to the administration, when this bond is broken, we have much deeper concerns about long term stability and operability. While I see both sides of the argument, I do not believe a resolution is needed to 'force open' the forums required, especiually a few days away from official campaigning. While the argument of Henn has been raised, and I certainly understand his prediciment, a number of other candidates have also posted campaigns early, for reasons unknownst to me. My question directed at Unibot would be, particularly as the entire argument for making this available was to help those who won't be available during the campaign period, who would get moved to the subforum? Everyone, or just Henn?
Gustav is Election Commissioner starting on the 15, because that is when the elections start.
Quote:My question directed at Unibot would be, particularly as the entire argument for making this available was to help those who won't be available during the campaign period, who would get moved to the subforum? Everyone, or just Henn? There's a lot of grey area here because everything that Henn, TAC and Llama did was legal. At the very least, the admins could create the subforum and move Henn's campaign there now - that would at least be consistent with the administration's position while respecting the fact that Henn can't campaign later in the election. Henn's campaign shouldn't be made out to be a nuisance so that the administration can make a point. I think that'd be a decent compromise in light of the ambiguities present and the concerns of the administrators. (11-11-2014, 06:36 PM)Sandaoguo Wrote: Gustav is Election Commissioner starting on the 15, because that is when the elections start. But you're not administrating the elections because you're going to be participating in them - so why should you be administrating the elections now? There's still the potential for bias whether we're talking about November 11th or November 15th.
Admins give one good reason why you should not make a sub thread? Or open up the Election Headquarters now? Both can be done by law.
Europeian Ambassador to The South Pacific
Former Local Council Member Former Minister of Regional Affairs Former High Court Justice
We're not in an election period, Unibot. That's exactly what we're saying. There is no election happening on the 11th, 12th, 13th, or 14th. Elections start on the 15th. People don't get to change the law on elections just by starting early.
(11-11-2014, 07:26 PM)Sandaoguo Wrote: We're not in an election period, Unibot. That's exactly what we're saying. There is no election happening on the 11th, 12th, 13th, or 14th. Elections start on the 15th. People don't get to change the law on elections just by starting early. It's not really changing the law. Interested individuals are requesting a place to post EARLY CAMPAIGNING information. I don't believe anyone is suggesting beginning the formal election or nomination period early. There is nothing pertaining to campaigning before the election period in our law. It is a little hypocritical for the administrative team to complain about people posting in the Assembly, when they would gladly post somewhere else if there were somewhere else to do it. The only way to prevent this argument from happening is to either A) prohibit early campaigning or B) creating an area in which it would be possible. It doesn't have to be in Election Central, it could be anywhere. The point is, the administrative team shouldn't just complain about something that could have a simple solution. (11-11-2014, 07:24 PM)Arbiter08 Wrote: Give me one good reason they should. "Because they've been asked to" is not a good reason. While "because we have been asked to" may not be a good reason to do it, mister Vice-Delegate, perhaps "because we are tired of people asking about this and posting their campaign information in the Assembly" would be a good enough reason for the Administrators to come up with a solution that works for both parties.
United States of Kalukmangala
Former High Court Justice |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |