Ejections

[Eluvatar]

I think we need a law regarding ejections.

Specifically, a law prohibiting ejections unless the ejectee meets certain conditions, and requiring an immediate Ecclesia vote to ratify or overturn the ejection.

For citizens, the vote would be an ostracism vote -- if the citizen isn't ostracized, the ejection is overturned (and any ban must be lifted).

What would be the certain conditions? Well, some ideas to start with:

- 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

Thoughts?

[Eluvatar]

Checking the bill of rights, in order for this to apply to citizens at all we need to define the enumerated reasons as criminal acts.

Wast brings up on IRC that we should probably specify that non-citizens get to appeal to the Ecclesia in that immediate vote regarding their ejection.

[Allama]

Whether it's a sign that your ideas/posts are excellent or of intellectual homogeneity growing in the region, I once again support everything Elu/Wast have said and add nothing of my own to the discussion.

 

[Bustos]

- having been ostracized

We can ostracized someone for having been ostracized before?  Sounds like double jeopardy but I digress.

As I stated before (in IRC), I fear this list will only allow loopholes to be created and would need to be continually amended to deal with troublemakers.  Everyone is here by their own choice and are allowed to be here by choice of the Ecclesia.  Being a member of Taijitu and on these forums is not a right;  It's a privilege.

If the Ecclesia believes someone should be ostracized, then they shall be ostracized.

[Delfos]

I like that there are a set of rules more than the empty possibility of ostracism for whatever reason. Loopholes can be fixed with time and i'm sure there's not much possibility of there being such grave mistrust towards fellow citizens.

As I said in IRC, I'd like there would be an expiration for every sentence, whether there is a set of limits for each offense or it is part of the Ecclesia's decision, I don't think we ought to be giving life sentences. You can always do it like the spanish who don't have life sentences but sentences are accumulative like 400 years in prison, I don't think anybody would plot such revenge that if you'd ban them for a year they'd come back to destroy the region with magic powers, they will surely not have the same trust as before anyway.

[Khem]

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?

[Delfos]

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.

[Khem]

I would prefer maximum sentences in place. Though i am unsure of what might be an appropriate maximum sentence for most of these offences.

[Allama]

Personally, I feel that doxxing or any other "misuse of personal information" should result in a permaban. Having someone hunt down your RL info and harass or stalk you is terrifying and absolutely unacceptable. There is no reason to allow such a person to reenter our community after being convicted.

This may also be appropriate for "deliberately endorsing a rogue/invader delegate of an ally". Once a traitor, always a traitor.

Otherwise imposing a time limit on bans seem quite reasonable.

[Eluvatar]

I'd rather the Ecclesia look at duration of bans on a case by case basis than try to predecide on a limit, honestly.

[Khem]

I'd rather the Ecclesia look at duration of bans on a case by case basis than try to predecide on a limit, honestly.

This works for me.

[Allama]

I'd rather the Ecclesia look at duration of bans on a case by case basis than try to predecide on a limit, honestly.

This works for me.

Suits me just fine as well.