NSG Senate Lobby: Bread, Circuses and Automatic Weapons

[The Nihilistic view]

Yes you can,

(3) It is unacceptable to question the integrity of impartiality of a Presiding Officer, or the Administrators of the Senate, and if such comments are made, the Administrators shall call for the withdrawal of the statements by the Member. Only with a call to question the impartiality of a specific Presiding Officer, confirmed and approved by five other Senate members via motion, may the impartiality of Presiding Officers, or the Administrators, be called into question.

I therefor call a motion questioning the impartiality of Ainin as an admin for his actions of only asking myself to "knock it off" and not also Kam.

No, you can't.

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=252408&p=16051660#p16051660

You put your admin hat on to do your "duty", so I can motion it.

[Maklohi Vai]

Yes you can,

(3) It is unacceptable to question the integrity of impartiality of a Presiding Officer, or the Administrators of the Senate, and if such comments are made, the Administrators shall call for the withdrawal of the statements by the Member. Only with a call to question the impartiality of a specific Presiding Officer, confirmed and approved by five other Senate members via motion, may the impartiality of Presiding Officers, or the Administrators, be called into question.

I therefor call a motion questioning the impartiality of Ainin as an admin for his actions of only asking myself to "knock it off" and not also Kam.

No, you can't.

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=252408&p=16051660#p16051660

Actually, that's a point of order, and this is a motion against impartiality. It's a legal motion.

[Ainin]

No, you can't.

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=252408&p=16051660#p16051660

You put your admin hat on, so I can motion it.

That makes no sense whatsoever. Admin is first and foremost an OOC position.

[Ainin]

No, you can't.

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=252408&p=16051660#p16051660

Actually, that's a point of order, and this is a motion against impartiality. It's a legal motion.

It's from the exact same bill. Why does a sniplet apply OOCly but the rest doesn't?

[The Nihilistic view]

You put your admin hat on, so I can motion it.

That makes no sense whatsoever. Admin is first and foremost an OOC position.

The exactly, and the law says a motion can be made against that OOC position.

It might not get anywhere but I can still make said motion.

[Minarchist States]

I wish I could archive it (the senate compass) somehow or put it where everyone can see. Hmm..

Thy Senate FAQ perhaps?

Alright then. I'll see if I can get it through the FAQ and if not I'll make a thread.

[Ainin]

That makes no sense whatsoever. Admin is first and foremost an OOC position.

The exactly, and the law says a motion can be made against that OOC position.

It might not get anywhere but I can still make said motion.

No, the law says a motion can be made against the IC position, which was created by the 1A-REA. The OOC position doesn't exist ICly, so the bill could not reference it.

[The Union of the West]

So basically the Admins can get away with partiality without being called out on it?

[Kamchastkia]

So basically the Admins can get away with partiality without being called out on it?

No, nihilistic is just being his usual self trying to fuck the fun of this up for everyone involved and trying to get everyone in a pissy mood, such are the ways of nihil, and this is why he's on my ignore list.

[The Union of the West]

So basically the Admins can get away with partiality without being called out on it?

No, nihilistic is just being his usual self trying to fuck the fun of this up for everyone involved and trying to get everyone in a pissy mood, such are the ways of nihil, and this is why he's on my ignore list.

That doesn't answer my rhetorical question.

[Ainin]

So basically the Admins can get away with partiality without being called out on it?

What? I just said the PPUBA was not the proper channel for OOC matters.

[The Union of the West]

So basically the Admins can get away with partiality without being called out on it?

What? I just said the PPUBA was not the proper channel for OOC matters.

Okay so how CAN partial admins be brought to justice?

[Ainin]

What? I just said the PPUBA was not the proper channel for OOC matters.

Okay so how CAN partial admins be brought to justice?

Through a civil and polite request for reasoning, which I even explained here, but was ignored in favour of "lololol ur biased".

[The Union of the West]

Okay so how CAN partial admins be brought to justice?

Through a civil and polite request for reasoning, which I even explained here, but was ignored in favour of "lololol ur biased".

Okay so lets say that the admin continues to be partial. (not saying you are; this is just hypothetical) Is any disciplinary action taken?

[Maklohi Vai]

I'm basing the following decision off of precedent:

Nihil's comments were recruitment, but of the OOC variety, not the IC variety. This can be seen because Ainin addressed him as Nihil, not Boris or Senator, and Nihil replied without making a correction. Therefore, as Ainin said, the PPUBA is not appropriate for this matter. Nihil will not be disciplined.

Now, let's look at the remainder of things in snippets here: Ainin's dismissal of Kam's statement alongside his special notice to Nihil's statement was also OOC, as he used their account names rather than IC names and was met again with no correction. Therefore, this entire incident is OOC, none of it is IC, and so none of it falls under the PPUBA. As such, Nihil's motion against Ainin is dismissed.

A couple things to be learned:
1. Saying *admin hat on* does not make your post IC, it just makes it an official admin post.
2. The Lobby is neither automatically OOC or IC, although this really should have been known beforehand.
3. If someone addresses you by your OOC name when you're talking IC, correct them. Same goes for the other way, IC to OOC. If you do not correct them, you can be held liable for what you said in either setting whether you meant it to be in that setting or not.
4. The Admin position is both IC and OOC. IC motions against impartiality can be brought under the PPUBA, while OOC admin decisions frankly don't affect the RP too much if you think about it. Nonetheless, if you wish to appeal an OOC admin decision, just come to us with your reasoning and we'll hear you through. Also, remember that the appeals process can be used in certain IC situations not dealing with impartiality per se.

[The Nihilistic view]

The exactly, and the law says a motion can be made against that OOC position.

It might not get anywhere but I can still make said motion.

No, the law says a motion can be made against the IC position, which was created by the 1A-REA. The OOC position doesn't exist ICly, so the bill could not reference it.

Why do you keep quoting a bill that does not exist?

[The Union of the West]

No, the law says a motion can be made against the IC position, which was created by the 1A-REA. The OOC position doesn't exist ICly, so the bill could not reference it.

Why do you keep quoting a bill that does not exist?

Wait what?

[Ainin]

No, the law says a motion can be made against the IC position, which was created by the 1A-REA. The OOC position doesn't exist ICly, so the bill could not reference it.

Why do you keep quoting a bill that does not exist?

I said the 1A-REA originally created the IC position of administrator, not that it is still in force.

[Gothmogs]

NPA: Aye
AQWAA: Aye
LPA: Nay (Too many easily-abusable technicalities)
NACREREA: Aye
CGABOR: Nay (I see the point, but this is kind of wishy-washy leftish, and arguably it holds cetaceans and great apes above humans for many areas of the law.)
HCA: Nay (The liberties given to hunters here are too broad)

These are the things you are supposed to point out before the vote begins, so they can be improved! It would be great if you could help me out with the problems you are noticing. I am obviously not the best bill writer out there, and I would appreciate the help.

[The Nihilistic view]

NPA: Aye
AQWAA: Aye
LPA: Nay (Too many easily-abusable technicalities)
NACREREA: Aye
CGABOR: Nay (I see the point, but this is kind of wishy-washy leftish, and arguably it holds cetaceans and great apes above humans for many areas of the law.)
HCA: Nay (The liberties given to hunters here are too broad)

These are the things you are supposed to point out before the vote begins, so they can be improved! It would be great if you could help me out with the problems you are noticing. I am obviously not the best bill writer out there, and I would appreciate the help.

.

[The Nihilistic view]

NPA: Aye
AQWAA: Aye
LPA: Nay (Too many easily-abusable technicalities)
NACREREA: Aye
CGABOR: Nay (I see the point, but this is kind of wishy-washy leftish, and arguably it holds cetaceans and great apes above humans for many areas of the law.)
HCA: Nay (The liberties given to hunters here are too broad)

These are the things you are supposed to point out before the vote begins, so they can be improved! It would be great if you could help me out with the problems you are noticing. I am obviously not the best bill writer out there, and I would appreciate the help.

If you want to form a little committee for your ministry I would be up for representing the views of the hunting community so we can have balanced laws.

[Louis Ashberry Brunnich-Thorn QC]

I have started a proper Law almanac. viewtopic.php?f=25&t=270010

Any help would be appreciated on different categories .

So far I have

law and order
taxation
environment
energy
welfare
military
senate procedures
executive power and system of governance
emergency services
health
international law
human rights
culture and sports
local governance
education
business law
family law
judicial law

Have I missed any? should any be merged? It would be good to know what you all think but please post it here not in the thread. Its closed for now.

[Brissia]

I have started a proper Law almanac. viewtopic.php?f=25&t=270010

Any help would be appreciated on different categories .

So far I have

law and order
taxation
environment
energy
welfare
military
senate procedures
executive power and system of governance
emergency services
health
international law
human rights
culture and sports
local governance
education
business law
family law
judicial law

Have I missed any? should any be merged? It would be good to know what you all think but please post it here not in the thread. Its closed for now.

Try capitalizing the sections.

[Louis Ashberry Brunnich-Thorn QC]

I have started a proper Law almanac. viewtopic.php?f=25&t=270010

Any help would be appreciated on different categories .

So far I have

law and order
taxation
environment
energy
welfare
military
senate procedures
executive power and system of governance
emergency services
health
international law
human rights
culture and sports
local governance
education
business law
family law
judicial law

Have I missed any? should any be merged? It would be good to know what you all think but please post it here not in the thread. Its closed for now.

Try capitalizing the sections.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO..............................REEAALLLYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Genius.

[Brissia]

Try capitalizing the sections.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO..............................REEAALLLYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Genius.

I prefer the description of 'educated individual'.