Rosie and I were having a discussion that began in an area where posting is limited to RA members. Since this is not a topic of a current bill that is exclusive to RA discussion, I felt it appropriate to move it into the General Discussion area.
The original thread can be found here: https://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=8569
Rosie Gray wrote: ↑Mon Aug 13, 2018 10:51 pmI don't see what the problem is with a spreadsheet that everyone can see with the link, and all on the RA have access to to comment on, and anyone else that wanted access to it to comment could have it if they asked. Is there a law somewhere that says we must use in-world or forums only to communicate? If so I don't know what it is so would appreciate seeing it! It just makes communication sense to me to use these tools.
To your question about existing law, I believe this has been a discussion that has come up several times over the years and resulted in at least two laws which are currently in force.
https://cdsdemocracy.org/faqs/cdsl-17-0 ... ation-act/
CDSL 17-01 Citizen Notification Act
1. Posting information on the CDS forums and via in world notices will be considered to be sufficient notification to citizens of changes which affect them.2. Citizens will be given at least 30 days notice of such changes.
3. This Act shall not apply to notice of meetings provided that any action taken at the meeting is ineffective for thirty days under this Act to allow citizen comment and requests for revision.
4. This Act shall apply only to general, public actions, and not to private actions (such as covenant enforcement and foreclosure for not paying tier)
Passed 30 June 2012, amended 4 August 2012
and
https://cdsdemocracy.org/faqs/cdsl-23-0 ... media-act/
CDSL 23-03 Social Media Act
(too long to post so follow link to see complete law)
The first law - the citizen notification act - came about because there had become a trend towards people feeling they had to participate in Facebook, they had to communicate via email, etc. and the law came about to make it clear that citizens were only accountable for information that was shared either inworld through the CDS group or on the forums...that citizens were not be expected to be responsive to information posted anywhere else.
There is the issue of CDS remaining in control of its own records. Yes, I posted the outcome of inworld discussions on a table I created on my own website but I DID also post the entire table here on these forums (even though it is currently not easily readable). Once an administrator activates the BBCode to read tables - that table will be entirely available here on this forum - in the place where it is supposed to be, in the place where it can reliably be accessed and secure in the CDS archive. It is not subject to the vagaries of outside corporate interests. (because you never know...the latest is Github being acquired by Microsoft, for example...)
There is the issue of forcing citizens to enter into multiple contracts with entities they might not want to do business with. To participate in the table Rosie created, for example, it requires not only that Rosie be contacted to give permission for them to participate but it also requires that a person sign up for Google+...it means a person has to enter into a contract with Google to participate in CDS business with all the strings attached that contract entails.
When the citizen notification act was passed into law, there were a number of other citizens who were not in favor of that kind of requirement, myself included.
Last but not least, even if there were no existing laws addressing these situations, to say "there is no law" is counterproductive. CDS is a living experiment in virtual democracy. If a situation isn't right in its current form, the whole idea is to put in place the processes to evolve and adjust the laws to make CDS a stable virtual home for all the citizens.
My opinions, for what they are worth.