Senate Protest and Analysis Thread

[Purple State]

I think a reasonable case could be made in court once he returns.

I'm kind of reluctant to support the amendment here....it doesn't seem appropriate in a democratic game.

On the other hand, it does seem it would protect Atlasia, regardless of principle.

Still...wouldn't it make more sense to try him in court once he gets back?

Apparently, there is some proof concerning Marokai Blue's account. I have not seen any proof yet, but it seems quite probable. We could always give him the maximum penalty for that, and that'd get rid of the problem for a while at least.

The problem is we need a permanent solution to his shinanigans. Is there no sentence of life without parole? There needs to be a way to permanently remove people from the game. It shouldn't be easy to do, but it should be an available option.

[Franzl]

I think a reasonable case could be made in court once he returns.

I'm kind of reluctant to support the amendment here....it doesn't seem appropriate in a democratic game.

On the other hand, it does seem it would protect Atlasia, regardless of principle.

Still...wouldn't it make more sense to try him in court once he gets back?

Apparently, there is some proof concerning Marokai Blue's account. I have not seen any proof yet, but it seems quite probable. We could always give him the maximum penalty for that, and that'd get rid of the problem for a while at least.

The problem is we need a permanent solution to his shinanigans. Is there no sentence of life without parole? There needs to be a way to permanently remove people from the game. It shouldn't be easy to do, but it should be an available option.

Yes, treason carries a maximum life ban from voting and holding office. The problem is...we need some real evidence that actual treason happened defined by the CCJA. I don't think it would be very easy to prove in court, especially evidence...usually...has to come from somewhere on the Atlas forum...and that'd be difficult considering Xahar has been banned for a while. OTherwise an admission of guilt would need to have been documented in a public place and witnessed by multiple people.

[Purple State]

Would treason extend to intent to sabotage an aspect of Atlasia? I think subversive tactics to attack an Atlasian party (RPP) or to induce fear upon individual members (Marokai) should be considered treason against Atlasia as a whole, no matter where the evidence is found (unless of course evidence can only be used from within the Atlas forum).

[Lief 🗽]

Would treason extend to intent to sabotage an aspect of Atlasia? I think subversive tactics to attack an Atlasian party (RPP) or to induce fear upon individual members (Marokai) should be considered treason against Atlasia as a whole, no matter where the evidence is found (unless of course evidence can only be used from within the Atlas forum).

No. Those things are not treason; that's ridiculous. I mean, I know people are out to get Xahar, but please let's not make a mockery of 1) the Atlasian legal system or 2) the Atlasian constitution to do it.

[Purple State]

Would treason extend to intent to sabotage an aspect of Atlasia? I think subversive tactics to attack an Atlasian party (RPP) or to induce fear upon individual members (Marokai) should be considered treason against Atlasia as a whole, no matter where the evidence is found (unless of course evidence can only be used from within the Atlas forum).

No. Those things are not treason; that's ridiculous. I mean, I know people are out to get Xahar, but please let's not make a mockery of 1) the Atlasian legal system or 2) the Atlasian constitution to do it.

I'm just trying to be clear of the law. I was hoping the answer would have been in the affirmative, but I guess we will just have to see how the mods treat Marokai's info and see if it warrants further investigation.

[Sir Coffeebeans]

I don't mind taking a more authoritarian stance on people who destroy the sanctity of this forum.

[Franzl]

Would treason extend to intent to sabotage an aspect of Atlasia? I think subversive tactics to attack an Atlasian party (RPP) or to induce fear upon individual members (Marokai) should be considered treason against Atlasia as a whole, no matter where the evidence is found (unless of course evidence can only be used from within the Atlas forum).

Treason is only for actually attempting to overthrow the government of Atlasia. And while many (including myself) believe that that was his intent....I don't think it's very likely that we have any case in court. I explained what evidence can be used in a previous post.

The terrorization of Marokai is also a terrible crime...but it certainly is not treason as defined by our law. I still think that incident would be the best way to go about right now, as it's (at this point) the most likely to result in a conviction. (Assuming we have clear evidence of that)

[Smid]

The terrorization of Marokai is also a terrible crime...but it certainly is not treason as defined by our law. I still think that incident would be the best way to go about right now, as it's (at this point) the most likely to result in a conviction. (Assuming we have clear evidence of that)

If it can be proven that he has done this to Marokai, then the evidence should be presented to the mods and he should be banned from the Forum permanently. If it can't be proven, then action should not be taken against him. Constitutional changes to prevent him from participating in the game is either a vastly inadequate punishment for what is clearly a terrible offence, or an unfair punishment against someone against whom no offence can be proved. This should be left in the hands of Dave and the mods.

[DownWithTheLeft]

I'm considering a bill to shut down the senate during the convention, or at least allow no votes on constitutional amendments

[Franzl]

I'm considering a bill to shut down the senate during the convention, or at least allow no votes on constitutional amendments

The latter would be more reasonable.

There are other things...not concerning the actual rules of the game, that could still be discussed.

[Franzl]

The terrorization of Marokai is also a terrible crime...but it certainly is not treason as defined by our law. I still think that incident would be the best way to go about right now, as it's (at this point) the most likely to result in a conviction. (Assuming we have clear evidence of that)

If it can be proven that he has done this to Marokai, then the evidence should be presented to the mods and he should be banned from the Forum permanently. If it can't be proven, then action should not be taken against him. Constitutional changes to prevent him from participating in the game is either a vastly inadequate punishment for what is clearly a terrible offence, or an unfair punishment against someone against whom no offence can be proved. This should be left in the hands of Dave and the mods.

OK, I agree. I was just talking from an Atlasian viewpoint, but you're right.

[Јas]

I ask that this bill be brought forth immediatley and put into the Emergency slot:

Resolution Regarding Constitutional Amendments

1.) No senator shall propose a constitutional amendment until the conclusion of the Constitutional Convention
2.) No constitutional amendments shall be voted upon until the conclusion of the Constitutional Convention

LOL

As if you need legislation to prevent this Senate from doing anything...

I'll also consider bringing a case to strike this as unconstitutional if it does somehow get passed.

[Peter]

I'd have to disagree - its a Senate rule for its proceedings, and the Courts have never interfered with these, and I would see it highly unlikely that they would.

[Јas]

I'd have to disagree - its a Senate rule for its proceedings, and the Courts have never interfered with these, and I would see it highly unlikely that they would.

Maybe so, but if that were to be the case, then surely the resolution itself would not be enforced by the Court and so would become immediately redundant on passage. It is at best a waste of time and effort.

[Peter]

But Senate rules are only enforced by the Presiding Officer. Its a bit like saying that an Irish Law is redundant because the Brazilian courts won't enforce it. Its a non-sequitur.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Modification to the World War II Commemoration Act

Section 3 is repealed.

     I remember that when the bill was first discussed, we tried to replace MLK Jr. Day with Civil Rights Day on March 3rd. Maybe we could give that idea another go.

[MasterJedi]

Modification to the World War II Commemoration Act

Section 3 is repealed.

     I remember that when the bill was first discussed, we tried to replace MLK Jr. Day with Civil Rights Day on March 3rd. Maybe we could give that idea another go.

Well my main point is that MLK is just one person in the civil rights fight and he doesn't deserve his own day all by himself. I got it abolished along with another bill that had a million pointless days abolished as well. The bill passed rather easily originally that banned the bill so I'm hoping that it goes that way again.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Modification to the World War II Commemoration Act

Section 3 is repealed.

     I remember that when the bill was first discussed, we tried to replace MLK Jr. Day with Civil Rights Day on March 3rd. Maybe we could give that idea another go.

Well my main point is that MLK is just one person in the civil rights fight and he doesn't deserve his own day all by himself. I got it abolished along with another bill that had a million pointless days abolished as well. The bill passed rather easily originally that banned the bill so I'm hoping that it goes that way again.

     DWTL made that point as well during the hearings for the World War II Commemoration Act. It would be nice to replace MLK's birthday with a day in honor of the Civil Rights Movement as a whole.

[MasterJedi]

Modification to the World War II Commemoration Act

Section 3 is repealed.

     I remember that when the bill was first discussed, we tried to replace MLK Jr. Day with Civil Rights Day on March 3rd. Maybe we could give that idea another go.

Well my main point is that MLK is just one person in the civil rights fight and he doesn't deserve his own day all by himself. I got it abolished along with another bill that had a million pointless days abolished as well. The bill passed rather easily originally that banned the bill so I'm hoping that it goes that way again.

     DWTL made that point as well during the hearings for the World War II Commemoration Act. It would be nice to replace MLK's birthday with a day in honor of the Civil Rights Movement as a whole.

True, though I'd rather have no holiday at all.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Modification to the World War II Commemoration Act

Section 3 is repealed.

     I remember that when the bill was first discussed, we tried to replace MLK Jr. Day with Civil Rights Day on March 3rd. Maybe we could give that idea another go.

Well my main point is that MLK is just one person in the civil rights fight and he doesn't deserve his own day all by himself. I got it abolished along with another bill that had a million pointless days abolished as well. The bill passed rather easily originally that banned the bill so I'm hoping that it goes that way again.

     DWTL made that point as well during the hearings for the World War II Commemoration Act. It would be nice to replace MLK's birthday with a day in honor of the Civil Rights Movement as a whole.

True, though I'd rather have no holiday at all.

     I'd rather have every day be a holiday. You see?

[MasterJedi]

Modification to the World War II Commemoration Act

Section 3 is repealed.

     I remember that when the bill was first discussed, we tried to replace MLK Jr. Day with Civil Rights Day on March 3rd. Maybe we could give that idea another go.

Well my main point is that MLK is just one person in the civil rights fight and he doesn't deserve his own day all by himself. I got it abolished along with another bill that had a million pointless days abolished as well. The bill passed rather easily originally that banned the bill so I'm hoping that it goes that way again.

     DWTL made that point as well during the hearings for the World War II Commemoration Act. It would be nice to replace MLK's birthday with a day in honor of the Civil Rights Movement as a whole.

True, though I'd rather have no holiday at all.

     I'd rather have every day be a holiday. You see?

Then no work or pay for you, go live in the alley out back!

[SPC]

Repeal of the Affirmative Action Bill

F.L. 28-9 is repealed.


Modification to the World War II Commemoration Act

Section 3 is repealed.


Repeal of the Aesbestos Ban Amendment Act

F.L. 12-5 is repealed.

Good work, Masterjedi.

[MasterJedi]

Repeal of the Affirmative Action Bill

F.L. 28-9 is repealed.


Modification to the World War II Commemoration Act

Section 3 is repealed.


Repeal of the Aesbestos Ban Amendment Act

F.L. 12-5 is repealed.

Good work, Masterjedi.

You won't like the third one, it repeals a bill to make aesbestos fully banned again.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Repeal of the Affirmative Action Bill

F.L. 28-9 is repealed.


Modification to the World War II Commemoration Act

Section 3 is repealed.


Repeal of the Aesbestos Ban Amendment Act

F.L. 12-5 is repealed.

Good work, Masterjedi.

     It didn't occur to me earlier, but I should mention that section 3 of the Asbestos Ban Amendment Act has never banned anything. After its passge Bono issued an executive order saying that there would be no restriction on the transportation of asbestos.

Repeal of the Affirmative Action Bill

F.L. 28-9 is repealed.


Modification to the World War II Commemoration Act

Section 3 is repealed.


Repeal of the Aesbestos Ban Amendment Act

F.L. 12-5 is repealed.

Good work, Masterjedi.

You won't like the third one, it repeals a bill to make aesbestos fully banned again.

     I think you would need to repass the original bill for it to come into effect again.

[SPC]

Repeal of the Affirmative Action Bill

F.L. 28-9 is repealed.


Modification to the World War II Commemoration Act

Section 3 is repealed.


Repeal of the Aesbestos Ban Amendment Act

F.L. 12-5 is repealed.

Good work, Masterjedi.

You won't like the third one, it repeals a bill to make aesbestos fully banned again.

Well, 2/3 ain't bad.