I guess this will remain a dialogue between you, HappyWarrior, and myself as long as A-Bob is officially absent and Inks hasn't taken office. Anyway, I'll briefly outline why I think the repeal of these two Acts makes sense.
Firstly, here's the text of the Mideast Activity Requirements Statute
1. Those registered voters of the Mideast Region shall be considered inactive if they have not posted at least five times in the forum at large in the four weeks prior to the commencement of a given election or vote, or have not posted at all in the fantasy elections boards in the eight weeks prior to the aformentioned commencement.
2. Under authority granted by Article IV, Clause 1 of the Regional Constitution, those considered inactive under Clause 1 of this Statute shall not be eligible to vote in a given election or vote.
This bill, if it is actually meant to be enforced, causes a lot of work for the regional election booth administrator (read: the Governor). Indeed, I think the benefit a strict enforcement of this bill would yield is not worth the effort, since it can probably be assumed that the overwhelming number of citizens who have fallen inactive and no longer post in the forum at large or in the Fantasy Election boards do not bother to turn up in an election anyway. Additionally, federal law states that a voter who has missed three consecutive votes will be deregistered automatically. Thus, since the intent of this bill is already covered by federal laws the existence of a regional Act on this matter is not necessary.
And now the text of the second Act in question, the Libel and Slander Penalization Act
1. It shall hereby be illegal for a member of the Mideast region to falsely and publicly slander or libel the name of another member of the region within the Atlas Fantasy Boards.
2. Slander shall be defined as harmful statements in a transitory form, especially speech, with the intent of causing damage to a member's reputation.
3. Libel shall be defined as harmful statements in a fixed medium, especially writing but also a picture, sign, or electronic broadcast, with the intent of causing damage to a member's reputation.
4. Clause 2 and Clause 3 of this Act shall not be read to limit slander or libel to the listed mediums of defamation.
5. Conviction by the Superior Court for acts of slander or libel shall result in a sentence of no more than a one month ban from holding office in the Mideast or a two month ban from voting in official elections in the Mideast.
While I support the main concern of this Act - defamatory statements should be discouraged - I doubt that this bill is very effective in reaching this goal. In fact, it is not always possible to determine whether a certain comment constitutes a case of libel or slander and the question remains whether the measures that are mentioned in this bill to fight libel or slander are appropriate. Also, I cannot think of a single case where the enforcement of this bill would actually have been necessary in the recent months. Finally, one must accept that defamatory statements, regardless of how primitive they can be, should be protected by the freedom of speech to a certain extent.
In conclusion, I think the above-mentioned bills no longer serve a valid purpose and can therefore be repealed without harm.