SENATE BILL: Do Not PM List Act (Law'd)

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This bill is now at final vote, please vote AYE, NAY, or Abstain.



Aye

[shua]

Aye

[Prez Duke]

Aye

[Californian Tony]

Aye

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

Heh... aye.

Deregistration would be much better but I'm relucant to make Duke sad by voting nay

[Rowan]

Nope

[Prez Duke]

Heh... aye.

Deregistration would be much better but I'm relucant to make Duke sad by voting nay

[oakvale]

It's not the best solution, but I prefer it to the status quo. Aye.

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

Heh... aye.

Deregistration would be much better but I'm relucant to make Duke sad by voting nay

Beside, bgwah was mean to me.

[bgwah]

Nay! This seems like a pretty clear violation of freedom of speech.

[Snowguy716]

Nay.  As if getting a PM now and then is really going to kill you.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This bill has enough votes to pass, Senators have 24 hours change their votes.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote on Final Passage of the "Do Not PM List" Act.

Aye (6): AHDuke99, Antonio V, Kalwejt, NC Yankee, Oakvale, and Shua
Nay (3): bgwah, RowanBrandon, and Snowguy
Abstain (0):


Didn't Vote (1): HappyWarrior


This bill has passed and is presented to the President for his signature or veto. 

[President Marokai]

Meh. This has no teeth and subsequently is entirely useless. This is really the only alternative we have to formalized deregistration? The "We Would Appreciate it if You Don't PM These People" list?

[Jayhawker]

X President Tmthforu94

Not an enthusiastic signing, though, and I seriously considered vetoeing it. I don't see this act being extremely successful, but it's a step up from what we have now.

[Rowan]

I'm disappointed that the president signed this needless legislation.

[bgwah]

Meh. This has no teeth and subsequently is entirely useless. This is really the only alternative we have to formalized deregistration? The "We Would Appreciate it if You Don't PM These People" list?

I doubt this assault on freedom of speech could hold up in court anyway.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Then sue, I am sure Spade and the boys would love you for it. For about 10 seconds.

[Californian Tony]

Meh. This has no teeth and subsequently is entirely useless. This is really the only alternative we have to formalized deregistration? The "We Would Appreciate it if You Don't PM These People" list?

I doubt this assault on freedom of speech could hold up in court anyway.

"assault on freedom of speech" ? LOL...

[President Marokai]

Meh. This has no teeth and subsequently is entirely useless. This is really the only alternative we have to formalized deregistration? The "We Would Appreciate it if You Don't PM These People" list?

I doubt this assault on freedom of speech could hold up in court anyway.

Oh I don't think I'd go that far. It's probably the fact that there's no teeth to this at all that it would hold up in court since there's no actual penalty.

Although, I think even if it had a penalty, you could lump it in to election-related political advertising bans that already exists in the voting booth specifically. If one argued that a PM-ban is unconstitutional because it infringes on free speech, you're just a hop skip and jump away from saying that bans on political campaigning in the voting booth are also unconstitutional.

Then again, the law is as the Justices make it. It's really all up to whatever Opebo and Ebowed decide.

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

Well, the bill have no teeths anyway.

[Californian Tony]

I honestly don't see how you can imagine to penalize a PM, which in theory shouldn't even made public. What could constitute a "proof" of infraction ? One can always put up a fake PM and pretend he has been "illegally PMed". No, that definitely makes no sense. Especially because, provided that campaigners acknowledge the no-PM-list, they would have no reason to PM those people, who probably will not even vote.