|
Post by Owen Edwards on Sept 25, 2008 20:16:54 GMT -6
So what about educational or professional qualifications? Can I be Owen Edwards MD?
And on the theoretical level, what I was really thinking of was the idea of someone with a "real life" but effectively inactive title (exiled royal, say). How does one treat that? His title is not Talossan, but should be respected (I'd say); he may wish to be Talossan, too.
|
|
Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Sept 25, 2008 20:28:29 GMT -6
If someone had a professional title, degree, etc- and wished to be refereed to as such.
Doctor, Lawyer, Indian Chief- if they earned the designation, and wanted us to use it when talking to or about them, then let the King , the Royal Scribe, and the SoS know, and it's a done deal.
I don't see what the problem is.
What Capt T is referring to is people falsely assuming titles or honorifics they did not earn, they did not achieve, do not deserve - and using that designation in a false or misleading manner.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Sept 25, 2008 20:40:30 GMT -6
Well, rather, he's saying that a Bavarian Prince, say, could not use said title in Talossa. That's the legal ramification.
|
|
Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Sept 25, 2008 21:21:26 GMT -6
If there is proof that he is a "Bavarian" Prince , then sure.
Just like if they can prove they are a Romanov, etc.
Provide documentation, and you get the letters.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2008 21:52:45 GMT -6
So what about educational or professional qualifications? Can I be Owen Edwards MD? And on the theoretical level, what I was really thinking of was the idea of someone with a "real life" but effectively inactive title (exiled royal, say). How does one treat that? His title is not Talossan, but should be respected (I'd say); he may wish to be Talossan, too. This is an act aimed at protecting titles of nobility. We presently have many citizens who claim to hold Doctorates, we do not regulate that because that would require us to have a body of physicians who certify and license physicians. If a person wants to put "J.D." or "LL.B" after his/her name, they can feel free, that doesn't mean they are licensed to practice Law in Talossa. In the case of exiled nobility, it will have to definitely depend on the country the nobility is exiled from, no? Shouldn't the decision be left up to the King whether to accept a foreign noble into his court? Otherwise we aren't really much of a country simply allowing other monarchs to appoint Lords, Ladies and Barons over us, now are we? If a Bavarian Prince comes to Talossa and we are all reasonably convinced he is a Bavarian Prince, all King John would have to do is accept said Prince into his court and thus he is recognized as nobility. Failure to regulate the titles at all means that anyone can walk in claiming knighthood from a micronation and we MUST accept it. Or, a person can claim knighthood or nobility through some bloodline that we cannot begin to prove and we MUST accept it. In this Kingdom, the King awards titles, not the King of Greece and not the King of Spain. Even in the Royal Courts of Europe, a noble from a foreign country must be accepted by the court, it isn't automatic, I cannot walk up to the Queen of England, declare that I am a Prince in exile from the Lost City of Atlantis and expect to be styled "Prince" in the Queen's realm. I think some of you guys are really over thinking this....I mean seriously, it is a pretty straight forward bill and so far I have been hit with objections related to professional degrees and what we should do if a Bavarian Prince wants to become a Citizen of Talossa.... Isn't it more likely we'll get a punk or two who claims a title from a micronation he/she concocted the night before and attempts to parade around Witt using it? Shouldn't we protect our nobles by not allowing that to happen? What does it say to Sir Trotxa and Sir Cresti to see a guy who just became a citizen last week hold the title of "baron" for something he did for another country.
|
|
Hooligan
Squirrel King of Arms; Cunstaval to Maricopa
Posts: 7,325
Talossan Since: 7-12-2005
Motto: PRIMA CAPIAM POCULA
Baron Since: 11-20-2005
Count Since: 9-8-2012
|
Post by Hooligan on Sept 25, 2008 23:46:44 GMT -6
I am reluctant to embroil Wittenberg with the government any more than it already is. Wittenberg is a wholly private-sector venture, a communications forum for the citizenry and others, with very little governmental involvement in its existence or function (and personally, I am very uncomfortable with even the small hand that the government has, by law, assumed in it). To make suspension from this public, non-governmental place part of a legal punishment for a criminal action seems to me improper. It would be like the government of the United States sentencing someone to an inability to use Wikipedia, or Yahoo! Groups for a month or something.
I also would wish to be sure that the right of our privateers (whether they be as-yet provided with letters of marque or reprisal or not) to use the appellation "Captain", "Capitan", or "Cap'n", not be abridged, as these persons do indeed captain their proud and fearsome vessels. I am not saying that the draft act as written does so (it seems to me that it doesn't); I was just wanting to use the words "proud and fearsome vessels".
The Count Basies, Duke Ellingtons, and Queen Latifahs of the world should also (as I believe they are, by this act as written) spared the rod. Maybe not Prince, though, although "Little Red Corvette" was okay, I suppose.
Hooligan
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2008 7:31:14 GMT -6
Our Privateers are most certainly assured the protection of their title. To read the text, one may not use a rank or insignia without authorization from the MoD, privateers have that very same protection. In the U.S., it is illegal to impersonate a military officer. Does that mean that Colonel Sanders was a felon? Is a Police Lieutenant living in fear the FBI will kick in his door because he uses a military title and rank? No, those are titles authorized by government entities (State of Kentucky for the Colonel and the Police Dept for the Cop).
Again, I really think that most of you are looking too far into this. This law specifically prohibits one from using a noble title for a fraudulent or misleading nature. This does not prevent a person who has the legal name of "Duke" from using his name, nor does it prevent a noble "in exile" from being recognized.
If you all do not approve of the punishment, by all means, propose alternates. should I change my name tomorrow and be "Count Asmourescu" and Dreu can, in fact, be "Baron Dreu" and that is just OK?
To the Baron's objection that the US would never sentence a person to the inability to use Yahoo! Groups. They do, in fact, do just that. If you commit a crime against the U.S. government, you go to jail where, believe you me, your Yahoo! Group participation is suspended until you are released. There, the U.S. government prevents your participation in ALL SORTS of public, non-governmental places. These punishments are not for someone who stumbles onto Witt and erroneously believes they can just give themselves a title, it is reserved for people who give themselves a title and then attempt to defraud others. If a person comes on Witt and claims he is the Duke of Pengopats and offers Knighthood to anyone who will send him $5, I'm thinking that person should probably not be on Witt.
Europe has such laws on the books to prevent pretenders to the throne from gathering a following and attempting to seize power. They have used those laws to imprison individuals who used unauthorized titles because, to Europeans, a person claiming to be a noble is just as criminal as a person in the U.S. claiming to be a physician without authorization.
I will say this one last time. This Act in no way prevents a person with a legal name that is a title of nobility from using their name, this act does not affect privateers, it has absolutely nothing to do with Doctors, Lawyers or other professionals and as a country that awards titles of nobility, we SHOULD protect those rights.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2008 8:14:32 GMT -6
Amended for additional clarification and protections.
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Sept 26, 2008 9:03:45 GMT -6
To make suspension from this public, non-governmental place part of a legal punishment for a criminal action seems to me improper. It would be like the government of the United States sentencing someone to an inability to use Wikipedia, or Yahoo! Groups for a month or something. We have something similar in current law. I would encourage the authors of bills such as this to refer to 35RZ34, the Criminal Code Reform Act, for ideas about possible criminal penalties and degrees of crimes. Wisconsin law, from which we get our core criminal code, divides offenses into felonies and misdemeanors. Each is subdivided into classes (class A, B, and C misdemeanors, and class A through E felonies). Each class has its own maximum fine and maximum term of confinement, so the law can define a specific offense as a "class A misdemeanor" and you know what the maximum sentence is. Of course, Talossa doesn't have any jails or prisons, so the Criminal Code Reform Act created procedures for courts to impose a "suspended sentence" with conditions and disabilities attached. One of those possible disabilities is a bar from posting on Witt. This would be similar to in U.S. courts where someone given a suspended sentence or probation instead of jail time may be ordered to do or refrain from doing certain things as a condition of probation. For example, someone convicted of a drug offense may be ordered to submit to drug testing, or someone convicted of drunk driving may be ordered to abstain from alcohol. People convicted of computer crimes have had their use of computers restricted as a condition of probation. Witt is private so it probably wouldn't be appropriate for a court to order the Witt admins to suspend Ian Neviens's account when Ian Neviens (rather than Witt or its admins) is the defendant. But the court could order Ian Neviens to stop posting on Witt, or probably even order Neviens to request suspension of his own account. Also, on the "Captain" issue: I see the bill now covers pilots, but the aviation term comes from the nautical term, which should also be protected. Commanders of non-military, non-privateer vessels use the title, such as Captain Ahab of the Pequod (fictional whaler), Captain Richard Woodget of the Cutty Sark (merchant ship), and Captain Edward Smith of the Titanic (ocean liner).
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2008 11:06:48 GMT -6
All right, I tweaked the punishments to comply with 35RZ34, but I'm also no lawyer so I could have made a mistake. Basically, for serious offenses, I set the punishment at imprisonment because my understanding is that if imprisonment cannot be ordered then the Cort can order revocation of citizenship according to section (b) of 35RZ34. I also added a clarification for the protection of ship captains which should protect private captains (as in the case of Capt. Smith) and merchant mariners and the like.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Sept 26, 2008 20:55:33 GMT -6
You're missing my point really, brother. Ah well. Doesn't matter!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2008 21:33:30 GMT -6
You're missing my point really, brother. Ah well. Doesn't matter! Then please clarify it, amigo. If you take a look at the Bill, I added quite a few provisions. One of which is that loophole specifically for the hypothetical "Bavarian Prince" that we mentioned earlier. If a person is a noble of another land, or an exiled noble or whatever, if they claim nobility, they present themselves to the King who determines if he will accept them as a noble. I think this is the most fair way to go about it. Otherwise, as I said, we run the risk of people emigrating from one-citizen micronations with titles from "Knight" to "King." This way, if an honest to goodness noble comes and convinces the King that he/she is a noble, they are good to go. Does that ease that legal ramification you were worried about or is there an additional concern? This bill isn't meant t o be oppressive. It is just meant to regulate one small aspect of our nation that is presently not regulated. So, I want to make sure we are all comfortable with the legislation and the impact it will have.
|
|
King John
King of Talossa
Posts: 2,415
Talossan Since: 5-7-2005
Knight Since: 11-30-2005
Motto: COR UNUM
King Since: 3-14-2007
|
Post by King John on Oct 13, 2008 19:50:24 GMT -6
In the famous "Wittiquette" document, It Is Written: You may use no armorial display, no coat of arms or heraldic device of any kind, as your Avatar, unless it has been granted to you by the King of Talossa, or unless you have the legitimate right to display the device in some foreign country and have duly registered it with the College of Arms. (But any citizen may use the Talossan flag as his Avatar.) Finally, you may not use any titles, ranks, or honours of nobility and chivalry in your descriptive text, unless those titles, ranks, or honours have been granted by the King of Talossa, or you have some other legitimate right to them, and that right has been recognized by the College of Arms.
WITTIQUETTE RULE 16: No unauthorized use of heraldic or armorial designs or titles of chivalry. I suspect the all-powerful and all-wise Witt Admins would not hesitate to enforce flagrant or repeated violation of this Rule by cutting off the offender's access to Wittenberg. Of course, it might need other or further enforcing, too. According to the Royal Household Cleaning Act, the College of Arms is authorized "to govern the armorial practice and regulations of the Kingdom". Might the heraldic part of this Act be handled by a regulation of the College? I'm just asking. — John R
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Oct 14, 2008 12:07:32 GMT -6
Rule 16 does cover a lot of the implications of this act - how external titles are recognised, etc (our Bavarian count would present himself to the King, whose College of Arms would deal with the issue). Interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2008 8:42:01 GMT -6
I suppose my intention is not just to reduce instances of people unknowingly using titles, but making it a criminal matter should a person attempt to commit fraud.
I think we can all think of a "noble" or two who is willing to sell you your very own title.
Presently we can stop them from posting on Witt but one who attempts to deceive cannot be prosecuted if they refuse to stop.
|
|