by Glen-Rhodes » Wed Jun 17, 2015 5:40 pm
by Mousebumples » Wed Jun 17, 2015 6:56 pm
by Jean Pierre Trudeau » Wed Jun 17, 2015 8:49 pm
Mousebumples wrote:Questions to consider:
2) What about instances where a player gets one answer while drafting from a single mod and submits and then has the collective group of mods decide that it's illegal after money/time has been spent campaigning? Would the player have been better served by having the collective group of mods determine that the proposal was illegal from the start rather than waiting until later?
by Christian Democrats » Wed Jun 17, 2015 11:56 pm
Leo Tolstoy wrote:Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.
by Jean Pierre Trudeau » Thu Jun 18, 2015 1:58 am
Christian Democrats wrote:Here's an easier process: Except in clear-cut cases, a moderator needs to be seconded to remove a proposal. Upon removal, he shall send a telegram to the author, outlining the rules under which the proposal was taken down. If the author wants to appeal the removal of a proposal, three moderators, none of whom were involved in original decision, will deliver a full written opinion, which will become precedential. All precedents will be binding on future decisions and will be listed and linked in the GA Rules thread.
by Kaboomlandia » Thu Jun 18, 2015 7:31 am
Christian Democrats wrote:Here's an easier process: Except in clear-cut cases, a moderator needs to be seconded to remove a proposal. Upon removal, he shall send a telegram to the author, outlining the rules under which the proposal was taken down. If the author wants to appeal the removal of a proposal, three moderators, none of whom were involved in original decision, will deliver a full written opinion, which will become precedential. All precedents will be binding on future decisions and will be listed and linked in the GA Rules thread.
by Mousebumples » Thu Jun 18, 2015 12:22 pm
by The Dark Star Republic » Thu Jun 18, 2015 12:55 pm
Christian Democrats wrote:...which will become precedential. All precedents will be binding on future decisions and will be listed and linked in the GA Rules thread.
by Glen-Rhodes » Thu Jun 18, 2015 1:02 pm
by Omigodtheykilledkenny » Thu Jun 18, 2015 1:58 pm
by Glen-Rhodes » Fri Jun 19, 2015 10:21 am
by Omigodtheykilledkenny » Fri Jun 19, 2015 10:46 am
by Christian Democrats » Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:01 pm
Glen-Rhodes wrote:Also, that is what precedent means.
Leo Tolstoy wrote:Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.
by Glen-Rhodes » Sun Jun 21, 2015 1:23 pm
Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:You suggested a "final appeal" - whatever that is.
Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:As to authors-only, if the mods disagree with a GHR and take no action on a proposal, then there's nothing to appeal. Appeals should only occur when the mods do take action on something - and thus affect the player(s) that submitted it - hence only the player(s) affected should be permitted to appeal.
by The Dark Star Republic » Sun Jun 21, 2015 4:18 pm
Glen-Rhodes wrote:We've been asking for a rulings archive for a while now. It doesn't seem that it'll happen, because mods think it's too arduous of a task.
That would also require that all rulings be posted on the forums.
by Omigodtheykilledkenny » Sun Jun 21, 2015 6:41 pm
Glen-Rhodes wrote:Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:As to authors-only, if the mods disagree with a GHR and take no action on a proposal, then there's nothing to appeal. Appeals should only occur when the mods do take action on something - and thus affect the player(s) that submitted it - hence only the player(s) affected should be permitted to appeal.
But this isn't how legality reviews work currently. Anybody can submit a review for a proposal, asking if X or Y is legal or illegal. It's never been just proposal authors that could do that. If I see a legality ruling that establishes a precedent that would affect me later on down the road, I see no reason why I shouldn't be able to appeal it, whether the ruling was that the proposal was legal or illegal. This is a game we all share, with rules and interpretations that apply to all of us. So it makes sense that if you have an argument to make, you should be able to make it. Mods should only be concerned with the merits of the argument, not who is making it.
by Glen-Rhodes » Sun Jun 21, 2015 6:50 pm
Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:And I imagine any ruling regarding player behavior in any part of the game sets "precedents" and would apply to everyone just as well - that doesn't mean anyone can appeal deletions, bans or warnings issued to other players.
Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:When proposals are deleted, they carry actual consequences for the submitting nation (whether merely a warning or something more serious like ejection or DEAT); therefore the submitting nation should be the one to decide if an appeal should be filed. Even the Supreme Court doesn't hear challenges from litigants who don't have an actual vested interest in the outcome of a case.
by Imperium Anglorum » Mon Jun 22, 2015 1:03 am
The Dark Star Republic wrote:Glen-Rhodes wrote:We've been asking for a rulings archive for a while now. It doesn't seem that it'll happen, because mods think it's too arduous of a task.
The mods are right. Mystifyingly, they went to the bother of setting it up - but then don't appear to have made any use of it since.
by Omigodtheykilledkenny » Thu Jun 25, 2015 2:28 pm
by Christian Democrats » Fri Jun 26, 2015 12:48 am
Leo Tolstoy wrote:Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.
by Bears Armed » Fri Jun 26, 2015 9:37 am
Christian Democrats wrote:* Possibly, I'd make an exception for a resolution author whose challenge against a repeal is unreasonably rejected.
by Frisbeeteria » Fri Jun 26, 2015 10:10 am
by Christian Democrats » Fri Jun 26, 2015 2:28 pm
Christian Democrats wrote:Here's an easier process: Except in clear-cut cases, a moderator needs to be seconded to remove a proposal. Upon removal, he shall send a telegram to the author, outlining the rules under which the proposal was taken down. If the author wants to appeal the removal of a proposal, three moderators, none of whom were involved in original decision, will deliver a full written opinion, which will become precedential.
Leo Tolstoy wrote:Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.
by Glen-Rhodes » Sun Jun 28, 2015 1:56 pm
Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:Well great, G-R, let's institute a system wherein an author can have his proposal declared legal - only to have to defend its legality again because a political opponent wants a second opinion (or, because some idiot just wants to cause trouble).
Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:Not even the US Constitution allows such tomfoolery.
by Omigodtheykilledkenny » Sun Jun 28, 2015 4:12 pm
G-R wrote:A violation of the rules will have gained legal status
Advertisement
Return to General Assembly Rules Consortium
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement