Proposal: Removing hot tub prohibition from the covenants

Proposals for legislation and discussions of these

Moderator: SC Moderators

Diderot Mirabeau
Master Word Wielder
Master Word Wielder
Posts: 453
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 6:28 am

Post by Diderot Mirabeau »

[quote="Ashcroft Burnham":2ckg0v09][quote="Diderot Mirabeau":2ckg0v09]if it is found through some transparent process that a covenant provision has some unintended consequences I am quite sure that a majority could easily be assembled in favour of remedying this.[/quote:2ckg0v09]

Actually, the Chancellor could remedy such a defect herself, under her power to waive the covenants in specific instances.[/quote:2ckg0v09]

Possibly but that would not solve the problem for the next guy (possibly under a different executive) or for the person contemplating buying land but being detered by reading the content of the covenants and surmising the uninteded consequence for himself without knowledge of the possibility for consulting the Chancellor to obtain the benefit of "executive priviledge."

Ranma Tardis

Post by Ranma Tardis »

[quote="Chicago Kipling":12zobpsc]With respect, this conversation has been overblown. I was trying to toss a few comments in to help provide some clarification and perhaps refocus on immediate, productive, practical solutions. Perhaps I've failed in all of that. I have no rebuttal.[/quote:12zobpsc]

Have run out of words, mostly and am not happy at tone of some postings. Have been flamed in this forum. Now my friend Chicago is being flamed trying to help.
Do not think there is a solution to this problem other than what I have done. Yes, Aliasi can overlook what might be an offending item to convent but that would be placing her position at risk.
Understand can vote in the next RA election but what if one disagrees with both choices?
Yes, I can make a faction. Wounderous! Ranma, a faction of one!
A special thank you to Pelanor for trying to represent my intrests in the RA!
Give up trying to change wording of convent. Lets just try and get along with each other as citizens of the CDS. Just because we do not agree on every issue does not mean we have to be foes. I extend my hand in friendship to my fellow citizens!

User avatar
Chicago Kipling
Passionate Protagonist
Passionate Protagonist
Posts: 151
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2006 2:07 pm

Post by Chicago Kipling »

Thanks for the kind words, Ranma. I'm not taking any of this personal. I was just hoping the conversation would evolve into: "Here's the part of what you said that I like. Here's the part I think we could improve together."

A good photograph is like a good hound dog, dumb, but eloquent. ~ Eugene Atget
User avatar
Aliasi Stonebender
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 586
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 12:58 pm

Post by Aliasi Stonebender »

[quote="Ranma Tardis":yijpmaq2]
Oh where to start?

Slavery in Rome was done for economic reasons.

That's nice. It doesn't make it more acceptable, then or now.

Also since nobody can force anyone to do anything in second life and that includes logging on there are no slaves in SL. Some residents call themseles such but this is a self pronounment.

That's also nice and something I'm fully aware of. I still find the mentality personally disgusting, just as disgusting as you're finding whatever flaws you see in CN. I'm big on personal responsibility, y'see. Little character quirk of mine.

The convent of CN was forced apon the residents and would be residents.[/quote:yijpmaq2]

Ranma, you are wrong. You just said why! NOBODY FORCED YOU TO BUY LAND IN COLONIA NOVA. NOBODY FORCED YOU TO BUY LAND IN NEUFREISTADT. The covenants, the ToS, the constitution and the laws were all there for you to read before you joined. It is implicit (and now spelled out explicitly in Sudane's new deed proposal) that by joining a place with a democratic government, you will accept the laws, rulings, and changes made by that government. You don't have the excuse of "it wasn't there before I joined!" with the pornography provision, as it's been there since before [b:yijpmaq2]I[/b:yijpmaq2] joined.

Do I seem harsh? I mean to be, though I'm trying to not flame, as such. But it's like this: I've been sympathetic to this point, Ranma, but you appear to have entered into an agreement without reading the "contract" and now wish to complain it wasn't what you thought.

Does this mean one should simply shut up and accept things they disagree with in the CDS? Hardly! My history gives the lie to that. But if you are in such fundamental disagreement that you'd rather flee to a 'good master', I have to seriously question why you joined in the first place. Take responsibility for your own actions, because nobody else will.

Member of the Scientific Council and board moderator.
Ranma Tardis

Post by Ranma Tardis »

I pick up my broken "peace pipe". I put it out in goodwill and someone has shattered it.
It was such a nice piece of work saying I understand the convent will not be change and lets be friends despite our differences. I was beginning to worry that this will result in a spilt in our comunitty and wanted to get this behind us and start the healing process.
I gently handle my shattered peace pipe and undertsand your message Aliasi Stonebender. No I do not have a "master" nevermind a "good" one. I do have friends but no master. My friends are my wealth and today am a little poorer.
I walk off toward the undiscovered country.

User avatar
Desmond Shang
Passionate Protagonist
Passionate Protagonist
Posts: 115
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 12:56 pm

Post by Desmond Shang »

Having just read all this - it's made me a little bit sad.

One perspective I like to weigh things against is the 'ten year perspective' - when we look back ten years from now, how will we see today?

It's almost like old college chums. Issues that seemed *so* important in their day - yet far down the line, we laugh, reminisce, and have a pint with even the most divergent of the "old gang" - because they are a part of us, our history.

* * * * *

Someday waaay down the line, we'll read a footnote about Neualtenburg, about Neufreistadt, Colonia Nova, Caledon - and the self-appointed historian will botch most of the facts. The reporting will be *horribly* wrong as such things invariably are.

But if we make our stand well, with honour and virtue and clarity - our primary goals might be reported at least semi-correctly. And the readers will sense the passion of our times, and perhaps wish they had the impact that we all can make now, at the dawn of the metaverse where *so* many precedents are being set, and culture defined.

Let's allow second, third, fourth, fifth chances for peace and understanding, if at all possible. All of us are, in a sense, all we got.

Post Reply

Return to “Legislative Discussion”