Proposed "Safe Mode" law.

Proposals for legislation and discussions of these

Moderator: SC Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Han Held
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 644
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 3:52 pm
Location: Neufreistadt (SL),Alaska (RL)
Contact:

Proposed "Safe Mode" law.

Post by Han Held »

Preamble:

Faced with a choice between inclusion and exclusion, a healthy democracy should always choose inclusion. Even bad actors may do good things and even negative personalities may make positive contributions. Our challenge is to find a middle ground that allows all people to participate while minimizing long-term financial, legislative and thematic risk to the health of the CDS.

Purpose:

The purpose of this law is safeguard the long-term interests of this estate against bad-faith actors. Bad faith in this instance is defined as groups or individuals who work within the letter of the law, but who exploit loopholes to work around the intent of the law or the spirit of democratic participation.

This law is intended to allow normal operations in the event of suspected electoral fraud, and is necessitated by the inability of secondlife tools and the secondlife terms of service to link individual accounts to individual votes.

This law is not intended to be used by a group, association, elite nor cabal to reinforce their power or status. It is strictly intended to be used as a remedy for questionable elections.

This law was drafted in response to concerns regarding voter fraud and is intended to serve as a more democratic alternative to changing the terms and definitions of citizenship.

Scope:
This state will last for one term, and will expire at the next term.
By definition, this does not apply to the SC, considering the self-selected nature of the SC.

The Law

In the event that an election has a suspicious and possibly fraudulent result, and is suspected by at least three CDS citizens in good standing, the following actions will be taken:

The applicants will open a thread on the forum and attest to their suspicions, giving as much detail and rational as they are able.
The opening of this thread will automatically set the estate into a state of alert (not emergency), this period will last until the SC makes a ruling on the validity of the election, if upheld by the SC this state will last until the end of the term.

In this state of alert the following limitations on governmental powers will apply:
1) Regions may not be authorized for purchase
2) Previously authorized regions may not be purchased during a contested term
3) Thematic changes to existing regions will not be allowed
4) Major landmarks (e.g. the Holy Schloss of Neufreistadt) will not be changed

The following powers, among others, will be granted to the disputed administration:
1)Term budgets may be proposed and accepted by the RA
2)Existing expenses such as teir shall be paid
3)The defense of the realm act may be used to ban hostile non-citizens as normal
4)Governmental agents may ban citizens as appropriate, upon such bans it will be noted that the citizen was banned during a contested period and the SC will be instructed to take that into consideration when weighing an appeal to the citizen's ban.

In the event of a contested election, day to day duties and administrivia should function as normal but any laws passed or actions taken during the term will be noted as happening during the course of a contested term.

Criteria

Note: It is intended that specific criteria will be worked out through discussions on the forum:

A contested election is one where any of the following qualifications apply:

1)An individual brings in a suspiciously large number of "new" residents to tip the vote in their favor.
1a)particularly if these residents are demonstratably non-participants (never go to events, etc)

2)there is a localchat confession or bragging of bringing people in to disrupt an election. Any TOS concerns are nullified by the fact that the CDS forums provide a non-LL binding please to share logs.

3)there is reasonable evidence coming from a third-party forum or social media (eg a screencap of someone calling for outside votes) of intentional vote fraud.


Postscript:
Let it noted that individuals who pay tier and participate in our estate for two or more consecutive elections are, in fact, full citizens regardless of any ulterior motives they may have had in joining our estate.
Love,
Monica
---
"We don’t do this "thing" ’cause it’s permitted. We do it because we have to. We do it because we’re compelled." -Rorsach, "The Watchmen"
User avatar
Rosie Gray
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1859
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 9:47 am
Location: west-coast Canada

Re: Proposed "Safe Mode" law.

Post by Rosie Gray »

Han Held wrote:Scope:
This state will last for one term, and will expire at the next term.
By definition, this does not apply to the SC, considering the self-selected nature of the SC.

The Law

In the event that an election has a suspicious and possibly fraudulent result, and is suspected by at least three CDS citizens in good standing (what is the definition of 'citizens in good standing; is it merely being up to date on their tier?), the following actions will be taken:

The applicants will open a thread on the forum and attest to their suspicions, giving as much detail and rational as they are able.
The opening of this thread will automatically set the estate into a state of alert (not emergency), this period will last until the SC makes a ruling on the validity of the election, if upheld by the SC this state will last until the end of the term.

In this state of alert the following limitations on governmental powers will apply:
1) Regions may not be authorized for purchase
2) Previously authorized regions may not be purchased during a contested term
3) Thematic changes to existing regions will not be allowed
4) Major landmarks (e.g. the Holy Schloss of Neufreistadt) will not be changed

The following powers, among others, will be granted to the disputed administration:
1)Term budgets may be proposed and accepted by the RA
2)Existing expenses such as teir shall be paid
3)The defense of the realm act may be used to ban hostile non-citizens as normal
4)Governmental agents may ban citizens as appropriate, upon such bans it will be noted that the citizen was banned during a contested period and the SC will be instructed to take that into consideration when weighing an appeal to the citizen's ban.

In the event of a contested election, day to day duties and administrivia should function as normal but any laws passed or actions taken during the term will be noted as happening during the course of a contested term.

Criteria

Note: It is intended that specific criteria will be worked out through discussions on the forum:

A contested election is one where any of the following qualifications apply:

1)An individual brings in a suspiciously large number of "new" residents to tip the vote in their favor.
1a)particularly if these residents are demonstratably non-participants (never go to events, etc)

2)there is a localchat confession or bragging of bringing people in to disrupt an election. Any TOS concerns are nullified by the fact that the CDS forums provide a non-LL binding please to share logs.

3)there is reasonable evidence coming from a third-party forum or social media (eg a screencap of someone calling for outside votes) of intentional vote fraud.


Postscript:
Let it noted that individuals who pay tier and participate in our estate for two or more consecutive elections are, in fact, full citizens regardless of any ulterior motives they may have had in joining our estate.
"Courage, my friend, it's not too late to make the world a better place."
~ Tommy Douglas
User avatar
Han Held
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 644
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 3:52 pm
Location: Neufreistadt (SL),Alaska (RL)
Contact:

Re: Proposed "Safe Mode" law.

Post by Han Held »

I meant being current and up to date on their tier, yeah. We don't have anything else that would affect someone's records (no one in the CDS gets felonies or have a cds police record, for instance).
Love,
Monica
---
"We don’t do this "thing" ’cause it’s permitted. We do it because we have to. We do it because we’re compelled." -Rorsach, "The Watchmen"
Post Reply

Return to “Legislative Discussion”