 |
|
Gilgamensch
|
|
France
Jun 2002 time: 06:26
|
|
OK, so again:
the court can make it's own rules.
Official threads can be seen as being taken place in front of the court.
Can the court decide on those? Yes it can.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Zaphod Beeblebrox
|
|
aachen, germany
Aug 1999 time: 05:26
|
|
it can't . iirc there's no line in the con saying the court can make rules. feel free to prove me wrong
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Gilgamensch
|
|
France
Jun 2002 time: 06:26
|
|
(a) The Court may make its own rules of procedure and enforce them upon citizens who are before it, so long as such rules are in accordance with the constitution.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Zaphod Beeblebrox
|
|
aachen, germany
Aug 1999 time: 05:26
|
|
well, but the citizens aren't before the court, unless they are trialed
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Gilgamensch
|
|
France
Jun 2002 time: 06:26
|
|
That's what I said: OFFICIAL polls (resolution/amendment/election) could be seen as being in front of the court, as being overseen by court.
SO the court could rule upon those rules on it's own.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Gilgamensch
|
|
France
Jun 2002 time: 06:26
|
|
Still don't see your point.
As you said there are no rules, so if the court would say:
No off-topic in OFFICIAL-polls, it is not against the connie. If somebody violates it, it would be breaking court rules and could be 'punished'.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Zaphod Beeblebrox
|
|
aachen, germany
Aug 1999 time: 05:26
|
|
it would be a restriction of the right of freedom of speech, which is mentioned in the con, but there isn't mentioned any right to restrict it in the con
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Gilgamensch
|
|
France
Jun 2002 time: 06:26
|
|
read beginning of this thread, there are limits........
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Gilgamensch
|
|
France
Jun 2002 time: 06:26
|
|
H Tower,
I DO like to debate, but certain things where so clear, that there wasn't really a need for.
For case number 007:
That is the exception of the rules. But otherwise..............
For my interesting point of view:
Some people might see it as stretching the con..... for me:
As the election has to be started by the court (3Ia) and can make it's own rules (III4a) and can rule upon those (III4c) and we have (III1a) and as the main point (V1a):
quote:
(a) The Court is empowered to oversee all elections and is empowered to resolve any election disputes according to the rules in this Constitution.
|
I don't see any reason, why people are saying it is not in the constitution. For me, it looks more like, that those who don't agree with should come back with an Amendment-poll.
And as I said before, I do not want to punish the citizens, I just want to have 'better' behaviour. It is normal to be sometimes off-topic, but what happened in the election-poll, wasn't what we should have had in there.......
And some people said: Let's leave it only to the our MOD, but why? It is us playing (within the rules of 'poly), so we should try to rule ourselves, without the need of a MOD. I see the MOD more as an (BORG ) interface between the server hosting us and ourselves, not as a 'real'-function (and the need) to control us.
Still would like to see more opinions, it seems to be just us discussing here 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
H Tower
|
|
I always thought you might have won if you filed a case, but you didn't, so now we'll never know.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Gilgamensch
|
|
France
Jun 2002 time: 06:26
|
|
DoT I really don't want to be to sarcastic, but did you follow the discussion and did you read the connie?
The whole idea of the connie are rules within rules. We 'all' agreed on. But suddenly people don't like it anymore and they want to break the rules and just because of easyness go back to the other rules...........
So like small kids............
That annoying......................
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mapfi
|
|
Zurich, Switzerland
Jul 2002 time: 06:26
|
|
Thank you DoT - you got it.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
H Tower
|
|
by saying freedom of speech cannot be denied unless you break forum rules, the reverse must be true. you break forum rules and the court can limit your freedom of speech.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mapfi
|
|
Zurich, Switzerland
Jul 2002 time: 06:26
|
|
yes, but the sentence doesn't give the court the right to rule on forum rules, it only allows it to restrict the freedom of speech with its rulings if the rules have been violated - to decide that we have ACS staff.
E.g. If someone created DL's to vote multiple times, our moderator would probably ban that person for some time but additionally the court could punish that citizen. Including ways that a moderator can't, e.g. not allowing them to be candidate in a election.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
H Tower
|
|
quote: Originally posted by mapfi
yes, but the sentence doesn't give the court the right to rule on forum rules |
and that is where we disagree
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mapfi
|
|
Zurich, Switzerland
Jul 2002 time: 06:26
|
|
yep, and no discussion is going to change my mind on that
|
|
|  |
 |
|
H Tower
|
|
* H Tower goes to look for another way to spark a discussion...
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:26. Apolyton Time is 00:26. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|