Discussion on Resident's Rights

Zukchiva · July 17, 2019, 6:04pm

I can’t argue against the point of the speciality of citizenship being degraded. At this point, it’s what you value more.

On the point of removing instant banning due to Nazis or trolls, I disagree.

Simply put, administration is OOC. Government is IC. When have we let IC laws affect our OOC lives?

An example of this is Drachen. Drachen was a citizen, a Provost, and a moderator on these here very forums. But they were found to be involved with the Sara case, and after a few days of discussion (since this was a high-standing citizen and they were gathering facts.), she was banned from TEP and later resigned every position. Along with this, a few other high standing citizens were banned.

None of them received a trial. Most, if not all, even got an appeal.

This would be the same case for Nazis. TEP has no IC law on them, and all our rules on them are OOC. If found to be Nazis, they would be banned instantly. If any discussion were to come up, it would be after. Certainly, however, if there would be any appeal for the ban, it would be to administration directly, as with any administration ban (that is, if the ban isn’t declared as final). In such cases, they would recieve no trial nor appeal with the Conclave, no matter if a resident or a citizen.

I believe spamming, trolling, and flaming and other such actions could also be bannable, but obvious being lighter offenses it could be assumed otherwise. We could, perhaps, give a clause that enables the government to ban residents for doing certain actions, protected or not.

But I assume that if any citizen started spamming or flamming, they’d be banned for breaking OOC rules, same as anything or anyone else.

Sent from my SM-J327P using Tapatalk

roleplay · July 17, 2019, 6:15pm

Forum Administration:
OOC things should not be included in IC regional government laws. If he was a citizen, with “rights,” then the result would have been the exact same. No “trial”, no “appeal” and no second chance. The same would apply in this situation of residents. To say forum and discord administration is above the law is correct because we don’t operate within the IC regional government of the region.

Emjay · July 17, 2019, 6:15pm

I think you missed the point about this being in connection with their World Assembly nation to even be granted a protected status. You can only have one of those. To be verified then that would mean a IP check. That’s all in my draft idea.

My idea for an amendment to the Concordant is to say “Protections granted to Residents shall be outlined by the Magisterium” or something like that. I’m still brainstorming.

system · July 17, 2019, 7:05pm

Why is a generic administrator account being used in discussion in the Magisterium? lol?

Anyway, if that were the case, then why is Merlovich still here? [mention]East Malaysia[/mention]
You said yourself in voice chat that banning him was “more complicated”, despite all the evidence that was provided by Asendavia. If the administration team handles these situations the same way with citizens as they do with residents, why hasn’t it been done?

Funkadelia · July 17, 2019, 7:47pm

So I’d really like to know two things:

Why is the root admin account being used to advance a position in the magisterium?

Why am I now hearing a different explanation of banishment from the region regarding a rule breaker like Merlovich than I did when I asked in the RP Discord voice chat, which was that banning a citizen is a complicated situation? These are very stark differences.

Emjay · July 17, 2019, 7:52pm

Because it was worthy of being listed under the documentation account posts’ and I didn’t want to double post because it wouldn’t have looked right with the new post design. It’s also a statement not discussion. That’s also not the root account.

While I did not want to use this as area as an admin… this is my opinion of the situation.

Those screenshots you are mentioning were presented previously and it was decided at that time they would get a stern talking first because it’s technically out of our reach [their server] and things did improve for a time. So at this point those screenshots are worthy to keep in mind but in my opinion are now beyond actionable because an action was already taken with them. I can ask the admin group, if you wish, but that’s my view of those.

Personally, I would be embarrassed to know such screenshots exist, because in my view as they have been seen my a large chunk of the region people will assume Merlovich is a racist. Nothing personal Merlovich but that’s just the truth of the situation and my personal opinion.

And when we did try to take a real action, members of the region, petitioned Fedele that it was their safe place and went against their rights and so on. So the recommendation was to install a member of staff, that ended up being Davelands, to be an admin of their server to keep it clean because it was felt that the action, while I disagree, went too far. So that’s the basics of why no statement was even issued on that server because it’s not going anywhere.

At the end of the day – it’s a case-by-case thing if you want to get to the bottom of it. I think in the future members of administration and moderation will remember that a “stern talking,” doesn’t work all the time.

I believe Merlovich has behaved since that time. Either I haven’t seen or heard… or he might assume that if he did say something really bad that he would get the kick. Which he would at that time.

So that’s why I say it’s complicated.

Davelands · July 17, 2019, 8:04pm

So in looking back through this, I see two separate proposals. Zuk’s Basic Rights of Residents and EM’s Protections of Residents. Both cover different areas yet overlap in places.

Can we have one, coherent set of rules to examine please?

Now, I am of the opinion that if you are in the region and have not become a citizen then you should have very little rights. One of the main things about becoming a citizen should be expanded rights and protections within the region. Any non-citizen runs the risk of being ejected from the region for any reason. If they even bother to ask the person who ejected them, then they should be given an explanation. If they disagree, then they should be able to petition the Conclave to have it overturned (without representation). I hate the lawyer process. The ejector explains their reasons why and the ejectee explains why it is unfair and the Conclave decides.

By the way, in the case of the Marsupial ejections (which spawned this thread), I believe that all of the Marsupials except for a couple were just ejected. They could have simply returned if they knew how or wished. Also, I don’t think that all that many even asked for an explanation.

As for the rest of it, let’s see what an actual document looks like before going off on items.

Emjay · July 17, 2019, 9:15pm

— Begin quote from ____

Rights of Residents

Residents cannot be banned if they have not broken the regional law of the East Pacific (as applies to residents*).
If residents have broken regional law, then they shall be ejected or banned at the discretion of the Delegate with notice of the ban at the time right before or after the action, with the reason for such a ban being given. If there is a specific process for banning, then the Delegate must follow that process before banning/ejecting residents (EX: Endorsement Cap Act states you must give 3 days notice before ejection).
If residents feel that the ban/ejection is false, then they shall have the right to appeal to the Conclave (with the exceptions of bans done due to trolling, spamming, or flamming on the RMB or forums, in which case, they cannot appeal. Alternatively, they also cannot appeal if they have already been put on trial prior to banning.)
If for whatever reason, the resident is unable to attend the trial on the forums due to age restrictions, then the resident shall choose a representative Citizen who will keep in contact with the resident and relay/represent the resident’s case to the court.
Residents have the right to appeal the denial of their citizenship application to the Viceory and the Conclave, and shall be able to defend themselves in such circumstances.
If a resident is banned, then they cannot apply for citizenship.
Residents shall have the right to free speech, exactly the same as Citizens.

— End quote

— Begin quote from ____

Protections of Residents

A Unprotected Resident is a nation located in The East Pacific that is not joined the World Assembly. They have no protections and can be ejected and banned from the region without reason.
A Protected Resident is a nation located in The East Pacific that is a member of the World Assembly and has endorsed the Delegate and Viziers. They can not be unreasonably ejected or banned from the region without a public statement from the executive detailing the reasoning of any ejection or ban on the forum. A majority petition by Protected Residents and Citizens can be filed for an appeal with the Conclave but have no rights to legal representation or trial.
A Verified Resident is a nation located in The East Pacific that is a member of the World Assembly and has claimed their residency on The East Pacific Off-Site forum for roleplay and World Assembly Center access. We recommend that they are members of the World Assembly and endorse the Delegate and Viziers but is not a requirement. They can not be unreasonably ejected or banned from the region and can appeal to the Conclave but have rights of legal representation or trial.

— End quote

Here’s both of the ideas back to back and the start of a draft and some housekeeping of the Concordant.

Article G: Residents

Section 1) A Resident is a nation that resides in The East Pacific.

Section 2) A unprotected Resident is a nation that has not endorsed the Delegate and Viziers.

Section 3) A protected Resident is a nation that has endorsed the Delegate and Viziers but has not joined the regional forum.

Section 4) A verified Resident is a protected Resident that has joined the regional forums or official Discord server(s) of The East Pacific but has not ratified the Concordat.

Section 5) The Delegate shall be charged with maintaining a record of all verified Residents.

Article H: Protections, Restrictions and Rights of Residents

Section 1) Unprotected Residents have no protections or rights.

Section 2) Each protected and verified Resident shall have the right to free speech and the government shall take no action to limit this except when a Resident is determined to be acting deliberately to cause a public nuisance by the Delegate and Regional Officers.

Section 3) Protected Residents can appeal actions taken against them to the Delegate or Viziers.

Section 4) Verified Residents can appeal actions taken against them to the Viceroy.

Section 5) Protected and verified Residents do not have the right of legal counsel or a trial before the Conclave.

Section 6) No banned resident can become a citizen.

Section 7) Each Resident nation may enter and leave the region freely, unless that nation has been banned.

Section 8) No Resident may serve in any office of The East Pacific government.

Article I: Amendments

Section 1) This Concordat shall take effect following a simple majority ratification vote of nations of The East Pacific publicly on the offsite forums, to be overseen by the Elders.

Section 2) The East Pacific Elders shall oversee the first elections for Delegate and Magisterium following the successful completion of the ratification process. This voting shall take place publicly on the offsite forums. The Elders shall cease to function thereafter.

Section 1) The Magisterium shall have the authority to propose an amendment to this Concordat by a 2/3 vote; such an amendment must receive the support of 3/4 of those Citizens voting in a referendum administered by the Conclave.

Section 2) Any changes made to the Concordat shall result in a new citizenship topic started with the amended Concordat in it. The former citizenship thread will be linked in that first post. [2013 Am 1, §8]

Llo · July 17, 2019, 10:29pm

Going with EM’s proposal, I like most of it after a cursory look, but I think there should be more clarity concerning the resident definitions.

From how I read it, nations who have joined the forums, endorsed the Delegate and Viziers, and have received citizenship seem to fall under all the categories of Protected Resident, Verified Resident, and Citizen, rather than those being mutually exclusive and effectively tiered, which is problematic because there are some clauses that particularly prohibit one or more of those categories from doing things.

I think Protected Resident should specify having not joined the forums, while Verified Resident should specify not having been granted citizenship, unless the distinction is made clearer in another part of the Concordat. In any case, better safe than sorry!

Zukchiva · July 18, 2019, 11:41pm

I pretty much agree with Llo on everything he said. However, I’m not having time to examine this throughout, so I’ll come back to this later.

Emjay · July 20, 2019, 3:24pm

I added two additional statements, in blue, for added clarity even with it being covered by the Concordat that a you must ratify and be naturalized to be a citizen.

Also should this pass, the verified Resident would take over the current Residents masking and existing Residents would be transferred to the RP’s Multipass group. The current mask only grants access to Gateway to the East, The Multiverse, WA Center, and Help Center. All other sections are visible but they can not make posts or reply as they are reserved for citizens.

Badger · August 5, 2019, 6:10pm

I think that it is of the utmost importance to get TEP residents to become TEP citizens. Offering protections to residents disincentivizes citizenship in my experience.

The gateway to a more prosperous region is to engage people to become active citizens whether their pursuit being the RP community, the WA, government or other passion. It is our duty to light their fire and get more residents to become citizens!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Emjay · August 5, 2019, 7:45pm

I don’t think this would undermine Citizenship but as a region we need to address the facts of our active residents. From what I have seen of this current generation of players that stick to the RMB and roleplay is that they have little to no interests in joining the forum or even becoming citizens. They are endorsing the Delegate and Viziers, making TEP their home, and in return for loyalty we should give them something, right? A longer term goal if this were to become part of the law would be for the executive to continue their efforts in recruitment of residents to the forum for citizenship.

Zukchiva · September 5, 2019, 11:35am

So I’ve looked over the draft, finally, and I like most of it.

The main issue I have is with the part where residents can’t do stuff in government. However, I understand that these amendments can really affect the value of citizenship in many people’s eyes, so I think it’s an okay compromise, and probably the best available one.

One thing I’d change is section 5, so as to state that no residents have the right to trial or legal counsel, in order to remove ambiguity.

Bachtendekuppen · September 5, 2019, 12:26pm

While I can see the point of these proposals, I believe the draft itself is rather complicated and confusing, and adds too many articles to the Concordat. I also believe the same objective can be reached with less changes, while better protecting the difference between Residentship and actual Citizenship.

I’m working on a reworked draft proposal for discussion, I’ll try to post soon.

Bachtendekuppen · September 5, 2019, 1:16pm

Alright I’ve designed a reformatted, simplified proposal as per my comments.

If EM does not accept his proposal to be amended, I’m always willing to withdraw it.

New draft :

— Begin quote from ____

Bill on the Rights of Citizens, Verified Residents and Nations of The East Pacific

WHEREAS the Concordat of the East Pacific grants rights and protections to the Citizens of TEP;
WHEREAS the Concordat does not recognize any such protections nor rights to the residents nor indivual Nations of the East Pacific;
WHEREAS the Nations of the East Pacific wish to secure the necessary rights and protections for all Nations and Residents of the East Pacific under the Concordat;

NOW THEREFORE, the Magisterium enacts as follows:

…1. “Article F: Rights of Citizens” of the Concordat shall be renamed “Article F : Rights of Citizens, Verified Residents and Nations of The East Pacific”.

…2. Sections 2,7 and 9 shall be removed, and the other current Sections of Article F shall be renumbered accordingly. Said Sections 2 and 7, as before said renumbering, shall be added as new Sections 13 and 14 respectively. Section 9, as before said renumbering, shall be added as a new Section 15.

…3. After Section 6, as renumbered by article 2 of this Bill, the following Sections will be added:
“Section 7) A Resident is a nation that resides in the East Pacific.

Section 8) A Verified Resident is a Resident that has endorsed the Delegate and the Viziers and has joined the regional forums of The East Pacific.

Section 9) Each Verified Resident shall have the right to free speech and the government shall take no action to limit this except when determined to be a public nuisance by the Viceroy in a summary judgement without trial.

Section 10) Verified Residents can appeal actions taken against them by the regional authorities to the Viceroy, who shall rule by summary judgement without trial.

Section 11) Verified Residents shall have no right to a trial by the Conclave, nor any right to be represented by legal counsel.

Section 12) Verified Residents may not serve in any office of the East Pacific government.”

Enactment

This bill shall come into effect upon its ratification by the Citizens of the East Pacific voting in a referendum administered by the Conclave, as set out in Article G of the Concordat.

— End quote

EM’s original draft:
[spoiler]Article G: Residents