Kaseido Quandry petitioned the SC as follows:
Honored Members of the Scientific Council:
This petition alleges fault in the actions of the CDS Chancellor, Sonja Strom.
I allege that by enabling candidates for the RA in the recent elections to post group notices, Strom acted to violate the election law passed on 9 May 2010, which prohibited candidates from using the group notice system for campaigning, and to violate the campaign procedures memorandum passed by the SC at your meeting of 10 May 2010, which codified the procedures set forth in the act of the RA and communicated them to all of the candidates.
Strom’s post on a forum thread entitled “NEW Rules for Election Campaigning” created by the Dean of the SC to clarify those rules (http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php? ... 069#p15069), in which she announced that she was enabling candidates to post to the groups, indicates that her intention was to enable candidates to violate the law. That two candidates, both of whom had received notice of the law, one of whom had in fact voted for the law, chose to use the ability granted by Strom indicates that her action did in fact enable election violations.
This action shows that Strom used her authority to grant access to the forums in a manner intended to violate the election laws and procedures established by the CDS, of which she was fully aware.
I ask that in remedy Strom be banned from holding any and all public offices in the CDS for one year from the date of your decision.
Respectfully,
Kaseido Quandry
Response from Sonja Strom, CDS Chancellor:
Honored Members of the Scientific Council:
This letter is in response to a citizen petition of the SC as a complaint against me, and a request made by the Dean of the SC for an investigation.
First of all, I wish to state that I have always worked hard to make the Confederation of Democratic Simulators the best place it can be for all of its citizens and visitors. Unfortunately, my efforts have not always been appreciated. Perhaps this is inevitable in a community such as ours, but I caution strongly against allowing personal or political attacks to compromise the principals and laws of the CDS.
Regardless of our disagreements, the CDS should not enact retroactive punishments, nor should it randomly apply interpretation of the law in a way that singles out one citizen. What is being asked in the complaint against me is that I “be banned from holding public office in the CDS for a time no less than one year from the date of the SC's decision.” There is nothing in the law that allows for this. Such a punishment can only be enacted after an official is impeached. I have never been impeached. Therefore, the law does not allow for such a punishment.Neither the complaint against me nor the SC request for an investigation have said I have broken any law. I cannot make this point strongly enough, because if I am accused of having broken a law, then that law should be clearly cited, giving specific terms of how I supposedly broke the law. Otherwise, not only am I denied the ability to correct a situation, I am also denied the ability to defend myself.
***
I would like to respond to the substance of the complaint against me as follows:
During the last campaign period, one candidate for office asked me if he could send notices to the CDS group for a meeting he would hold. Holding candidate meetings and announcing them with notices is a longstanding tradition in the CDS. This has happened in every election I can recall in the CDS, and I saw nothing wrong with it in this last election. I gave the candidate that ability, and he did send a notice - actually during the Representative Assembly meeting where a new regulation of citizen campaigning was agreed upon by the RA. Afterward, these new election procedures were promulgated by the SC, and announced in the CDS Forums here:
http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2868
Then complaints were made in the CDS Forums that other candidates did not also have the ability to send notices like the one that had been sent. These posts can be found here:
http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php? ... 862#p15055
and here: http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php? ... 868#p15060
In a timely manner I responded in the same places as these complaints were made, explaining how this had come to be. I agreed it would make sense for all of the candidates to have the same ability as the one candidate who had originally asked for it. I granted every candidate the right to send notices, and announced my doing so here:
http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php? ... 862#p15066
and here: http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php? ... 868#p15069
These permissions were given in a spirit of fair play and a desire to help all of the candidates equally.***
In the past I have always attempted to abide with CDS regulations, and I will continue to do so in the future.
It would seem the statement I have just made above is the true issue of the matter. However, rather than giving us a chance to work together in a supportive way to resolve these issues, we are now instead being asked to compromise our Constitution and our laws, and to enact extraordinary and illegal penalties against me as a citizen. As a community we have a duty to have fair, published laws that all can abide by, or we risk falling prey to an endless stream of destructive personal and political attacks. I am merely asking that our most fundamental principals be upheld.
Having responded to this unwarranted personal attack on me, I do think that we should move in a constructive manner to have all rules regarding elections published as clearly on our website as the Constitution is, and that all citizens should be bound only by duly published laws. Our goal should be to make a fair and just society, which is what I have always stood for as a citizen of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators.I trust this letter clarifies the situation, and I have faith that the Scientific Council will make the just decision. I thank the Council for this opportunity to respond.
Respectfully,
Sonja Strom
Chancellor of the CDS