Criminal Code Revisited

[Gulliver]

Some time ago a discussion on adopting a criminal code was started. It ultimately petered out with many people stating they'd prefer to handle things on a case by case basis as we have been doing so far. Our Constitution, however, states that "[n]o person may be charged for a crime that was no crime at the time of commission" and "[n]o citizen may be ejected from Taijitu or limited in their access to the Regional Forums absent criminal charges." As I read this, we currently cannot charge anyone with a criminal offense because there are none defined.

This brings to mind two questions we should discuss, namely whether my interpretation of the law is correct and whether we should alter the Constitution or adopt a criminal code to address this situation. A related question is whether we want to even have a classical sense of "criminal code" and just work by ostracizing people if we feel it's necessary. The one key point I see immediately is being able to limit in-game abuses by the Delegate without preventing them from maintaining a basic degree of security and orderliness.

[Delfos]

I believe the last discussion had a good support towards a list of offenses, so I think quoting the last discussion would be helpful. Why did I not do it myself? sorry I don't have time D: when I come back home I might do it. kthxbye

[Bustos]

The power still resides in the Ecclesia in all matters.  If the majority vote that a crime was committed and punishment is warranted, then a crime was committed and punishment shall be carried out, regardless how it is worded in the Constitution.

That's my take on it.

[bigbaldben]

I think a list of crimes is a good idea, especially given the inconsistencies Gulliver pointed out.

I would hope that such a list would be 1) well-defined but also 2) really short. 

As Morpheus said "we well know that the reason most of us are here is because of our affinity for disobedience."   

[Delfos]

If the majority vote that a crime was committed and punishment is warranted, then a crime was committed and punishment shall be carried out, regardless how it is worded in the Constitution.

that'd be terrible. You can't say it's a crime without a previous list of offenses. Anyway here's some snippets from the last discussion:

Let's just keep it simple with things we know we don't want.

No illegal shit on our forum.
No harassing other members.
No stalking/phishing other members.
No racism, no sexism, no homophobia, etc.

I'm in favor of the the ad hoc approach, at least while our active community is small. On the other hand, I like the idea of having statutes of limitations and sentencing guidelines for major crimes in law somewhere, and find it hard to imagine an act with such things in it that doesn't provide a list of specific crimes. Perhaps we should discuss this, and at the very least we will have produced a set of guidelines for the Ecclesia to consider should the need arise for them.

This is why I support a list of crimes spelled out in legislation, should we need a Citizen-Mediator it would be nice if they had legal precedent to work with. Rather than going contrary to being negative to an adhoc legal function, I believe it is a boon for such.

Can someone link or post the forum usage rules? I can't find em.

[AwesomeSaucer]

Quick draft of High Crimes:

High Crimes
1. No Taijituan shall post, in an illegal fashion or that would be considered illegal to Taijitu and such Taijituan's "real-world" nation, any post to the regional forum, IRC board, Skype board, or RMB.
2. No Taijituan shall, repeatedly and with malicious intent, harass, bully, torment, stalk, or perform any action to another Taijtuan or group of persons that causes such Taijituan or group of persons anguish, embarrassment, or any other extreme negative emotion.
3. No Taijituan shall post any link to the regional forum, IRC board, Skype board, or RMB that, if clicked, would cause the clicker's computer to be infected with a virus, or would provide the clicker's private information to the original poster.

If any Taijtuan performs such above high crimes, and is convicted and found guilty by the Ecclesia, such Taijtuan is subject to punishment designated by the Ecclesia, with a maximum punishment of permanent ban.

[Delfos]

Quick draft of High Crimes:

High Crimes
1. No Taijituan shall post, in an illegal fashion or that would be considered illegal to Taijitu and such Taijituan's "real-world" nation, any post to the regional forum, IRC board, Skype board, or RMB.
2. No Taijituan shall harass, bully, torment, stalk, or perform any action to another Taijtuan that causes such Taijituan anguish, embarrassment, or any other negative emotion.
3. No Taijituan shall post any link to the regional forum, IRC board, Skype board, or RMB that, if clicked, would cause the clicker's computer to be infected with a virus, or would provide the clicker's private information to the original poster.

If any Taijtuan performs such above high crimes, and is convicted and found guilty by the Ecclesia, such Taijtuan is subject to punishment designated by the Ecclesia, with a maximum punishment of permanent ban.

I think the motif is still a case-by-case, you just need to list what can be considered an offense, the treatment of such offense will be either agreed between parties through a Mediator or put to everyone's scrutiny in Ecclesia if there are no agreements. We've had this discussion before and I'm against "permabans".

I agree on the front of time limits on this but otherwise find the list to be comprehensive. Should different offenses have different lengths of ejection or are we talking permabans for some?

I'm disagreeing with permabans. If most people are so sensitive to some subjects more than others I wouldnt mind that much if some were close to permabans, if you give a ban for 3 years is virtually the same as permaban. We either decide the appropriate time at each sentence through Ecclesia for each case, or we set maximum time limits for each offense.

btw link to a much older discussion about this issue: http://forum.taijitu.org/proposals-and-discussions/ejections/

comes with a nice list from Eluvatar:

- Misuse of personal information (i.e. doxxing)
- Impersonation (of a specific person or of a particular role in Taijitu)
- flaming (personal attacks) or spamming (egregiously) on the RMB
- (willfully?) breaking NS rules
- lying in your citizenship application
- lying about an election on the RMB or by telegram
- having been ostracized
- acting in Taijitu as an agent of a foreign power
- couping an ally of ours (TNP/TRR)
- deliberately endorsing a rogue/invader delegate of an ally

[AwesomeSaucer]

Quick draft of High Crimes:

High Crimes
1. No Taijituan shall post, in an illegal fashion or that would be considered illegal to Taijitu and such Taijituan's "real-world" nation, any post to the regional forum, IRC board, Skype board, or RMB.
2. No Taijituan shall harass, bully, torment, stalk, or perform any action to another Taijtuan that causes such Taijituan anguish, embarrassment, or any other negative emotion.
3. No Taijituan shall post any link to the regional forum, IRC board, Skype board, or RMB that, if clicked, would cause the clicker's computer to be infected with a virus, or would provide the clicker's private information to the original poster.

If any Taijtuan performs such above high crimes, and is convicted and found guilty by the Ecclesia, such Taijtuan is subject to punishment designated by the Ecclesia, with a maximum punishment of permanent ban.

I think the motif is still a case-by-case, you just need to list what can be considered an offense, the treatment of such offense will be either agreed between parties through a Mediator or put to everyone's scrutiny in Ecclesia if there are no agreements.

Yea, pretty much.  I just wrote some things that could be considered "offenses."

We've had this discussion before and I'm against "permabans".

I agree on the front of time limits on this but otherwise find the list to be comprehensive. Should different offenses have different lengths of ejection or are we talking permabans for some?

I'm disagreeing with permabans. If most people are so sensitive to some subjects more than others I wouldnt mind that much if some were close to permabans, if you give a ban for 3 years is virtually the same as permaban. We either decide the appropriate time at each sentence through Ecclesia for each case, or we set maximum time limits for each offense.

As you said, "case-by-case jurisdiction" and the Ecclesia still has absolute power.  All I said was a maximum punishment, not an absolute one.  If you are against permaban, you absolutely do not have to vote for it. 

[Bustos]

If the majority vote that a crime was committed and punishment is warranted, then a crime was committed and punishment shall be carried out, regardless how it is worded in the Constitution.

that'd be terrible. You can't say it's a crime without a previous list of offenses.

If it isn't broken, don't fix it.



Alrighty, lets break this down....

Quick draft of High Crimes:

High Crimes
1. No Taijituan shall post, in an illegal fashion or that would be considered illegal to Taijitu and such Taijituan's "real-world" nation, any post to the regional forum, IRC board, Skype board, or RMB.

And what exactly is considered an "illegal fashion" and/or "illegal to Taijitu"?  I have no idea what crime(s) is being defined here, if any.

2. No Taijituan shall harass, bully, torment, stalk, or perform any action to another Taijtuan that causes such Taijituan anguish, embarrassment, or any other negative emotion.

So if someone's post makes another mad and/or sad, it's a crime?

3. No Taijituan shall post any link to the regional forum, IRC board, Skype board, or RMB that, if clicked, would cause the clicker's computer to be infected with a virus, or would provide the clicker's private information to the original poster.

Okay, actual criteria listed for reasonable offenses.  No objection here.

If any Taijtuan performs such above high crimes, and is convicted and found guilty by the Ecclesia, such Taijtuan is subject to punishment designated by the Ecclesia, with a maximum punishment of permanent ban.

And what does this do?  Put the punishment at the will of the Ecclesia?  This is the current system in place.


...and why are these considered "high" crimes?

[AwesomeSaucer]

Alrighty, lets break this down....

Quick draft of High Crimes:

High Crimes
1. No Taijituan shall post, in an illegal fashion or that would be considered illegal to Taijitu and such Taijituan's "real-world" nation, any post to the regional forum, IRC board, Skype board, or RMB.

And what exactly is considered an "illegal fashion" and/or "illegal to Taijitu"?  I have no idea what crime(s) is being defined here, if any.

It means you can't post anything illegal here.

2. No Taijituan shall harass, bully, torment, stalk, or perform any action to another Taijtuan that causes such Taijituan anguish, embarrassment, or any other negative emotion.

So if someone's post makes another mad and/or sad, it's a crime?

I think you know what I mean, but I'll tweak it to say "repeatedly" and "with malicious intention."

3. No Taijituan shall post any link to the regional forum, IRC board, Skype board, or RMB that, if clicked, would cause the clicker's computer to be infected with a virus, or would provide the clicker's private information to the original poster.

Okay, actual criteria listed for reasonable offenses.  No objection here.

If any Taijtuan performs such above high crimes, and is convicted and found guilty by the Ecclesia, such Taijtuan is subject to punishment designated by the Ecclesia, with a maximum punishment of permanent ban.

And what does this do?  Put the punishment at the will of the Ecclesia?

Yep.  Direct democracy always wins.

[Myroria]

I am strongly opposed to faux-ostracism, of the sort that involves banning a single person via a single at-large vote of the Ecclesia.

Now, if we are going to put punishment in the hands of the Ecclesia and not in a court, we should ensure that the Citizen-Mediator, or Mediators, are completely unable to remedy the situation at hand before proceeding to a proper vote of ostracism (and before anyone points this out, yes, ostracisms were usually preventative, not a punishment):

Each year the Athenians were asked in the assembly whether they wished to hold an ostracism. The question was put in the sixth of the ten months used for state business under the democracy (January or February in the modern Gregorian Calendar). If they voted "yes", then an ostracism would be held two months later. In a section of the agora set off and suitably barriered,[2] citizens gave the name of those they wished to be ostracised to a scribe, as many of them were illiterate, and they then scratched the name on pottery sherds, and deposited them in urns. The presiding officials counted the ostraka submitted and sorted the names into separate piles. The person whose pile contained the most ostraka would be banished[...]

The two-month gap is a key feature in the institution, much as in elections under modern liberal democracies. It first prevented the candidate for expulsion being chosen out of immediate anger, although an Athenian general such as Cimon would have not wanted to lose a battle the week before such a second vote.[9] Secondly, it opened up a period for discussion (or perhaps agitation), whether informally in daily talk or public speeches before the Athenian assembly or Athenian courts. In this process a consensus, or rival consensuses, might emerge. Further, in that time of waiting, ordinary Athenian citizens must have felt a certain power over the greatest members of their city; conversely, the most prominent citizens had an incentive to worry how their social inferiors regarded them.

The gap between the vote and the "election", as it were, is important. It provides a period for cooling down period, and the "election" for ostracism - wherein anyone is eligible - is an excellent way to prevent witch-hunts. We would of course have to change things to make it applicable to our needs - like shortening the cooling-off period from two months - but in general we should leave the process the same.

If we're not going to establish a court to actually deal punishments, this is how it should happen.

I think if anyone is doing things that violate the forum ToS seriously or RL-laws, that warrants an immediate ban by administration.

[Khem]

I am strongly opposed to faux-ostracism, of the sort that involves banning a single person via a single at-large vote of the Ecclesia.

Now, if we are going to put punishment in the hands of the Ecclesia and not in a court, we should ensure that the Citizen-Mediator, or Mediators, are completely unable to remedy the situation at hand before proceeding to a proper vote of ostracism (and before anyone points this out, yes, ostracisms were usually preventative, not a punishment):

Each year the Athenians were asked in the assembly whether they wished to hold an ostracism. The question was put in the sixth of the ten months used for state business under the democracy (January or February in the modern Gregorian Calendar). If they voted "yes", then an ostracism would be held two months later. In a section of the agora set off and suitably barriered,[2] citizens gave the name of those they wished to be ostracised to a scribe, as many of them were illiterate, and they then scratched the name on pottery sherds, and deposited them in urns. The presiding officials counted the ostraka submitted and sorted the names into separate piles. The person whose pile contained the most ostraka would be banished[...]

The two-month gap is a key feature in the institution, much as in elections under modern liberal democracies. It first prevented the candidate for expulsion being chosen out of immediate anger, although an Athenian general such as Cimon would have not wanted to lose a battle the week before such a second vote.[9] Secondly, it opened up a period for discussion (or perhaps agitation), whether informally in daily talk or public speeches before the Athenian assembly or Athenian courts. In this process a consensus, or rival consensuses, might emerge. Further, in that time of waiting, ordinary Athenian citizens must have felt a certain power over the greatest members of their city; conversely, the most prominent citizens had an incentive to worry how their social inferiors regarded them.

The gap between the vote and the "election", as it were, is important. It provides a period for cooling down period, and the "election" for ostracism - wherein anyone is eligible - is an excellent way to prevent witch-hunts. We would of course have to change things to make it applicable to our needs - like shortening the cooling-off period from two months - but in general we should leave the process the same.

If we're not going to establish a court to actually deal punishments, this is how it should happen.

I think if anyone is doing things that violate the forum ToS seriously or RL-laws, that warrants an immediate ban by administration.

Something like two weeks would be sufficient for us, this would be preferable to the aimless lists suggested thus far. Would we have specific times for raising the question of such?

[Delfos]

Why are we doing that? Just to mimic ostracism? I'm pretty sure the system already in place is fine, Mediator act or w/e already tries to fix offenses between members, if no agreement is met Ecclesia will deal with it. Offenses against the collective is the same thing. Just list the damn offenses and they will be dealt case-by-case.

[Khem]

Quick draft of High Crimes:

High Crimes
1. No Taijituan shall post, in an illegal fashion or that would be considered illegal to Taijitu and such Taijituan's "real-world" nation, any post to the regional forum, IRC board, Skype board, or RMB.
2. No Taijituan shall harass, bully, torment, stalk, or perform any action to another Taijtuan that causes such Taijituan anguish, embarrassment, or any other negative emotion.
3. No Taijituan shall post any link to the regional forum, IRC board, Skype board, or RMB that, if clicked, would cause the clicker's computer to be infected with a virus, or would provide the clicker's private information to the original poster.

If any Taijtuan performs such above high crimes, and is convicted and found guilty by the Ecclesia, such Taijtuan is subject to punishment designated by the Ecclesia, with a maximum punishment of permanent ban.

a nice list from Eluvatar:

- Misuse of personal information (i.e. doxxing)
- Impersonation (of a specific person or of a particular role in Taijitu)
- flaming (personal attacks) or spamming (egregiously) on the RMB
- (willfully?) breaking NS rules
- lying in your citizenship application
- lying about an election on the RMB or by telegram
- having been ostracized
- acting in Taijitu as an agent of a foreign power
- couping an ally of ours (TNP/TRR)
- deliberately endorsing a rogue/invader delegate of an ally

I much prefer the previous Eluvatar originated list of crimes vs the list of AwesomeSaucer. I might work up a better draft of crimes if I can get the time today. Very thoroughly against wishy washy language and the term "Taijituan" we're Taiji's damn it!

[AwesomeSaucer]

Quick draft of High Crimes:

High Crimes
1. No Taijituan shall post, in an illegal fashion or that would be considered illegal to Taijitu and such Taijituan's "real-world" nation, any post to the regional forum, IRC board, Skype board, or RMB.
2. No Taijituan shall harass, bully, torment, stalk, or perform any action to another Taijtuan that causes such Taijituan anguish, embarrassment, or any other negative emotion.
3. No Taijituan shall post any link to the regional forum, IRC board, Skype board, or RMB that, if clicked, would cause the clicker's computer to be infected with a virus, or would provide the clicker's private information to the original poster.

If any Taijtuan performs such above high crimes, and is convicted and found guilty by the Ecclesia, such Taijtuan is subject to punishment designated by the Ecclesia, with a maximum punishment of permanent ban.

a nice list from Eluvatar:

- Misuse of personal information (i.e. doxxing)
- Impersonation (of a specific person or of a particular role in Taijitu)
- flaming (personal attacks) or spamming (egregiously) on the RMB
- (willfully?) breaking NS rules
- lying in your citizenship application
- lying about an election on the RMB or by telegram
- having been ostracized
- acting in Taijitu as an agent of a foreign power
- couping an ally of ours (TNP/TRR)
- deliberately endorsing a rogue/invader delegate of an ally

I much prefer the previous Eluvatar originated list of crimes vs the list of AwesomeSaucer. I might work up a better draft of crimes if I can get the time today. Very thoroughly against wishy washy language and the term "Taijituan" we're Taiji's damn it!

Lol, I honestly hate Elu's list. The language is certainly easier on the eyes, but it gets WAY too political with "deliberately endorsing a rogue/invader delegate of an ally" and such.  That isn't acceptable in my opinion.  And I swear by my life that we are Taiji, but the majority says otherwise.