Proposed Amendment to Covenants for next RA Meeting

[Bagheera]

Citizens, please weigh in with your thoughts here. My goal is to serve you, so please speak your mind so I can represent you properly. Thank you.

Proposed Amendment:

1. Temporary Covenant Variance: No more than once every 6 months, every parcel may be granted a single Temporary Covenant Variance not to exceed 15 days in duration to allow for special events. Declaration to take advantage of the variance must be posted 3 days in advance in the forums (here) stating the general nature of the variance and its claimed duration. No Adult content or anything that might run afoul of Child Endangerment Laws or in violation of TOS or the Constitution allowed. Objects that emit particles or sound outside covenant must be confined to the parcel by using About Land tools or other methods. Variances are granted on an as-claimed basis, however the government reserves the right to request alterations or revoke the variance if neighbors that own parcels in the same sim come forward with complaints (so when possible, please contact your neighbors beforehand to let them know your plans and work out any rough edges).

[Shep]

Hi Bags .. yes mostly support that .. I think I would make the notice time a week .. if I'm planning something I know at least a week before lol ... and that gives neighbours a chance to voice and iron out objections before hand ... also I think it should be only a week per event .. that is surely ample ... I'll be happy to put this on the agenda .. and look forward to hear peoples opinions

[Lilith Ivory]

If you really think we need more laws to regulate events - fine with me. I am only concerned about the wording.
While I do not propose to hold "Adult" events in our community I have no idea what "anything that might run afoul of Child Endangerment Laws" means exactly and those laws might differ extremely in different countries anyway. Can´t we just stay with the TOS (part of our constitution) and the maturity rating of our Sims to spare us nerve-racking discussions in the future?

more details about the maturity ratings can be found here if anybody is interested: http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Engl ... a-p/700119

[Tanoujin Milestone]

First of all, Bagheera, you know very well I permanently violate the covenant at LA in several ways. Deliberately, by the way. And I am open to discuss that with you in private, since I learned such spoils your fun. Indeed I am ready to make *anything* temporary which disturbs your experience. This is a privilege I personally grant you in a negative sense: you can make my stuff disappear.

But what I rezz on my land, according to my idea of the theme, which is much broader than a covenant can ever contain: here I am listening to people who are qualified to teach me. And, frankly, I did not ask you to educate me in regards of history and archaeology.

What makes me wonder is why we talk about another regulation (and, no, I do not agree that a covenant is a law. I think covenants are collections of executive regulations that must be within the rule of law), another regulation that is a carrot which belongs to a stick.

If you want to enforce the covenant: start with me. I am cooperative. Others are not. Are we going to return objects after the 3rd warning? I do not follow you down that road. It is not wise to prepare this kind of escalation.

I do not want to be governed quite so much. Once every 6 months? Every parcel? 15 days? Justified by an event? To be announced 3 days in advance on the forums? And every neighbor will have a right to complain?

If you want a persuasive overall look, I am with you. You and me, two citizens. Let us *agree* on an expert and just follow her instructions. We will have to discuss violations of the theme again and again on a single case basis. With modesty, patience and tolerance.

I will defend my liberty. And the liberty of my neighbor. My answer to this proposal is: Nay.

[Bagheera]

Dear Tan:

There seems to be an extraordinary disconnect between what I intend and what people are hearing. The purpose of this amendment was to make things more liberal while remaining equitable and fair to ALL citizens.

You say I "know very well" of your "permanent" covenant violations. I do not. If you are doing them deliberately, isn't that really indicative that the covenants need to be adjusted? Laws are by and for the people, so if the laws do not serve, then the laws should be changed, which was what I was trying to do here...to SERVE the people - all the citizens of CDS - and not just a preferential few.

This isn't about MY fun at all, really. It is about saving CDS. Tan, you've said repeatedly it looks like we are going to have to lose LA because CDS can't afford to carry the sim. I believe a big reason we don't have any growth is because people come to CDS and they see our rules...and THEN they see that some people don't have to follow them while others do. Some of our citizens appear to be "more equal than others". Our covenants are attractive. This assertion isn't based just on my personal opinion but seems to be the consensus from reading many discussions spanning the appeal and success of Neufreistadt to compliments about the bucolic spaces along the river.

There is nothing in my amendment that introduces new negativity to CDS. You are worried about neighbors complaining. The only reason they aren't complaining is because No One Is Here. There are No Neighbors to complain. When we have a sim full cheek to jowl and someone decides to float a platform 10 meters in the air, people will complain because they can't do it too OR they will start doing it themselves. This amendment allows for a temporary disruption in a way that will keep things neighborly and kind....at least that is my intent.

I invited discussion here to help refine this amendment. You are saying this amendment in its current form gets a big "no" from you. Is there any form that would make you say "yes" or consider it in a positive light?

Thank you.

[Bagheera]

Yes, Lilith, thank you. I was erring on the side of caution. My concern is I know Linden monitors for inappropriate content and will label a parcel Adult when warranted - because of child endangerment issues (I believe) since they made SL accessible to minors. I'm not an attorney and I was hoping others would weigh in, such as you have, to help find the right balance. In real life, I worked briefly for a group of psychologists who counseled victims of violent crimes, primarily (sadly!) young children. I have seen how bad things can be, so I tend to be overly cautious when it comes to protecting children. I absolutely want others to be a part of crafting this amendment, as you have here. I am not perfect. Thank you.

[Tanoujin Milestone]

Without any amendment to the covenant:

Whenever people think it was a good idea to hold an event, they consider whether they have enough resources to do that on their private land. If not, they ask the chancellor to provide public resources. Events can be of public interest, citizens should feel invited to use public structures for that. If it is a spontaneous party, people should feel free to rez whatever they need on public ground without having to ask.

Such events may exceed the limits of the sim theme. They are temporary. In my humble opinion this is not worth any discussion as long as someone responsible is present to answer. Furthermore an event held on a regular basis will justify some permanent compromises and adjustments until the justifying activity "dies out". This has to be balanced with the obligation to clean up of course.

I expect a chancellor to try to coordinate that - if needed! - in a relation of vertical service (top down) and accountability (bottom up) to the best of her ability. May she act in a climate of trust, cooperation, tolerance, empowerment and fostering of citizens' creativity!

It is up to the citizens to announce their events. I have heard there is an issue with events on public land that can not be advertised on the SL event calendar without the help of the chancellor. If that is true, it should be discussed.

If an event is held on public land, the general interest of the CDS must be taken into account, there has to be a broad consensus about form and content, and it must be public in the meaning of "everyone is welcome". Preparation and deinstallation should be finished within a reasonable time frame. If there is any doubt, people should remember to notify the chancellor, a question of courtesy.

But if a citizen holds an event on her private land, and I am very strict about that, privacy must be respected. CDS citizens are encouraged to rez and build within the theme. And they are encouraged to have a friendly, open, educative discussion about the quality of their buildings. This affects objects that are permanent.

Those objects have thresholds and doors in some cases. This are the red lines that separate the realm of privacy from the state, a state that should not try to control its citizens beyond that limits without being called authoritarian.

Whatever people do behind their closed doors, not to speak of the sky: it is a lawless sphere in which we have the opportunity to be just free and equal. This is where we make our decisions, to wear chains or to question the legitimacy of authority, to enter or leave the social contract.

Some are afraid of it. I welcome it. I surrender some of my freedoms and comply with the law. As long as my privacy is protected.

Come help me to revise my parcel, dear Bags.

[Tanoujin Milestone]

And by the way: people under the age of 18 years are not allowed in our Sims
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_ ... econd_Life

[Shep]

Keep trying to post .. each time it takes me to login

[Tanoujin Milestone]

Bags, you asked for compromise. I hope you feel understood, and I hope you see it is very hard to think of a compromise while our points of view differ fundamentally. Please criticize what I posted here, I want to move in your direction.

Anyway, I feel you are trying to make the style of governance you intend to apply if you are voted in as chancellor a general rule for yourself and all your successors in office as long as you are still able to change the rules as a representative, that is, adapt the rules according to your agenda.

In my understanding the chancellor is free to enact regulations according to her specific working style as long as she abides to the law.

Section 2 – Powers of the Chancellor
The Chancellor of CDS shall, subject to the laws of CDS, have the power:
(a) to determine the use to which any and all land in CDS shall be put;
[…]
(f) to make regulations pursuant to the above; and
(g) to enforce such regulations in accordance with law.

So, if you want to allow a single temporary covenant variance per parcel and term for 15 days and so on, good to know, go ahead! Do so when you are in office. Do we really need to write it into the covenants? Then I suggest we remove it after your hopefully successful term to avoid an spaghetti-effect of every office holder leaving a footnote in the covenants.

[Shep]

HA! NOW it works ... I'll try again ....

I think I see where the disconnect is .. Bags means to give people the right to having items rezzed for an event OUTSIDE their property walls that would normally be considered out of covenant ... it's nothing to do with what you do inside your walls .. that has always been no ones business but yours .. nor do we need a list of 'but not ......' because our laws and TOS are still absolute .. we are simply talking things like a bumper ride being up for a few days .. Which btw I thought was fine when the wall was around it as a compromise .. but by then we had people upset who simply wanted CDS to have some fun ...

[Callipygian]

Citizens, please weigh in with your thoughts here. My goal is to serve you, so please speak your mind so I can represent you properly. Thank you.

Proposed Amendment:

1. Temporary Covenant Variance: No more than once every 6 months, every parcel may be granted a single Temporary Covenant Variance not to exceed 15 days in duration to allow for special events. Declaration to take advantage of the variance must be posted 3 days in advance in the forums (here) stating the general nature of the variance and its claimed duration. No Adult content or anything that might run afoul of Child Endangerment Laws or in violation of TOS or the Constitution allowed. Objects that emit particles or sound outside covenant must be confined to the parcel by using About Land tools or other methods. Variances are granted on an as-claimed basis, however the government reserves the right to request alterations or revoke the variance if neighbors that own parcels in the same sim come forward with complaints (so when possible, please contact your neighbors beforehand to let them know your plans and work out any rough edges).

While I appreciate the attempt to find some resolution, I don't personally see how this addresses any of the current and most recent concerns. In the worst case it creates a 'legal' way for neighbouring parcels within one's view to be dramatically out-of-covenant for 3 or more months of every 6 (based on 6 parcels in view . I also feel it doesn't address any perceived bias on the part of the Chancellor - on the contrary, it creates a law that forces him or her to enforce the law unequally, based on 'complaints from neighbours'. So let's say Citizen Joe has a parcel, and likes his neighbour Fred..so when Fred want's to rez the Starship Enterprise he has no complaints..but he doesn't like Sue, so objects to her ferris wheel 3 weeks later and she is told her variance isn't allowed or must be modified. If the Chancellor of the moment is a friend of Fred and not of Sue the accusation of favouritism, no matter how unfounded, will pop up again.

I would personally prefer that the RA ask the Chancellor to designate public fair grounds in a couple of sims. These can be lovely park spaces when not in use for an event. If citizens wish to hold events that require objects that are glaringly out-of-covenant for longer than a few hours, they can be directed to use the fairgrounds. The tradition of fairs goes back many centuries - the Romans held them, and they became a crucial aspect of trade and commerce in medieval Europe. This would allow citizens to have fun events that are anachronistic, while actually incorporating a tradition that fits with the themes of all of our sims (including Monastery, since many medieval fairs were held in church yards and grounds).

At that point the Chancellor's duty is what I believe it should be, deal with scheduling so that events don't conflict, and ensure that the event falls within the laws of CDS re: content and access. No need to arbitrate among neighbours, no perception of favouritism likely, and citizens can enjoy the view from their own parcels on a continuous basis.

Calli

[Tanoujin Milestone]

Interesting idea, Calli. The gypsy parcel in CN would be a candidate - but we would change a leasehold parcel to common land and alter the break even point of the sim. We should not forget about our deficit and the balance of public and private land. Maybe it could be claimed temporarily for the Landverwaltung and set back for sale after the event as it was done for the "cross my palm with silver" - event?
Alternatively such fair grounds could be sponsored privately. I can not speak for the Alpine Meadows United Artists, but the Taraxacum group in LA is able to offer 4,000 sqm of continuous land any time...

[Bagheera]

I think that is a great idea Calli - the parcel that contains the Amphitheater is quite large and all public land, so we already have the space, I think. Thank you for your thoughts.

[Tanoujin Milestone]

I would personally prefer that the RA ask the Chancellor [sic] to designate public fair grounds in a couple of sims.