Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Jul 4, 2013 11:10:42 GMT -6
Hello Esteemed Court,
I am slowly getting up to speed on Talossan Law, trying to figure out what changed since I was last active.
Back then, I was the Secretary of State and executed the duties of the Sribe of Abbavilla (without having the title) by storing the results of the laws into the Talossa Database system which became unavailable at some point in 2004 or 2005, after I left as a citizen.
Now that I am back, I made the old database available again, and I noticed that there are differences between the then-official database and the wiki which lists in an official manner the laws of the country in a way I had only dreamed of back in 2004, with a full correspondence of repealed and failed laws, whereas the database had no historic context: a law later repealed was still marked as approved for the clark it was in and not retroactively modified.
As part of my personal interests, I want to computerize the clarks published and voted on between the moment I left and now, so that we have an electronic body of law in a formal format (a wiki is en electronic body, but it is now a formal database format, I can explain the difference if you have further questions).
I do realize that any clarks from June 2004 and later that I later migrate to the database will not be official in nature unless later certified because the database was not live and is only secondary information.
But, clarks published in the database were indeed official when they were published in my capacity as SoS and constitute a primary source. For those unaware of this fact, during the period of the database, Cosa Members and Senators did not vote on Wittenberg threads, but rather in an password protected electronic form which officially and legally recorded their vote. The SoS was also authorized to record votes of Cosa Members and Senators who were not online. As such, the database is truly the primary source.
As a result, I have found at least 1 difference so far between the official record in the wiki, and the database. That difference is here: Act 32RZ1, They are Almost Talossans Too, You Know, Act
This act was proposed by me, personally. The spouse referred to in the 6th WHEREAS is the Mother of my dandelion and my Wife, who was in Wittenberg and wanted to become a citizen until Ben started his attacks.
The results and test of the law is here:
talossa.cabserver.net/files/bills.php?cosa=32&bill=1
The act was officially approved and became a law, but the WIKI lists the law as having failed.
Here are my questions to the court about this:
- Iz 32RZ1 in place?
- When the Database has, for the period for which it was official ( 28th-32th Cosa) shows a difference with the official records, can the new official records be corrected since the Database was then the official records and could be considered an historical document providing new information?
- When the database has more complete information about data predating the 28th Cosa (generally because it was information painstakenly retrieved from past SoS or former official archives), can it be used to simply supplement the official records?
- When the database show contradictory information about the data predating the 28th Cosa, who is qualified to make a decision about which record is more appropriate? Should an historical inquiry be simply launched?
- If I start adding repeal information from the current official records to the database system without changing any other information, does the Court consider this sufficient changes to invalidate the database as an historical source for the period preceding the 33th Cosa since it was modified?
- When I was maintaining the Database, I was doing so in my official duties as Secretary of State and as a result, no laws or appointments were even made to entrust me with it, which is why, when the secession occured and I was harassed, I felt like taking the database offline (but not deleting it) was my best leverage against illegal actions by a certain individual. Considering that specific case, do I now need an official mandate to build tools to help the SoS in his or her duties and so, which official mandate? Would being a special staff member of the SoS office (as mandated by 30RZ11, also written by me) constitute a mandate? Should it be instead a position under the position of Scribe of Abbavilla?
- If I continue to maintain the database in an official duty and the government/SoS later decides to use the database for official business, what happens if for some reason, I am replaced in that official duty and yet, remains the only person technical able to maintain it?
- Alternatively, could I register a corporation until Talossa law which offers the services of the Database as per a fixed contract with the government which ensures that the data contained in the database actually belongs to the government, but which recognizes the 2000 hours or so I spent building and populating the data in the database as well as future time I might spent putting it up to date and up to the standard of services that the Government/SoS expects? That way, I could official bid for offering services (not for money, mind you), as a private contractor with obligations to the country.
If there is a problem with me asking the questions (like if I need a lawyer to ask for me) feel free to let it be known. If this is not the right place, feel free to move the thread to the right place.
I am slowly getting up to speed on Talossan Law, trying to figure out what changed since I was last active.
Back then, I was the Secretary of State and executed the duties of the Sribe of Abbavilla (without having the title) by storing the results of the laws into the Talossa Database system which became unavailable at some point in 2004 or 2005, after I left as a citizen.
Now that I am back, I made the old database available again, and I noticed that there are differences between the then-official database and the wiki which lists in an official manner the laws of the country in a way I had only dreamed of back in 2004, with a full correspondence of repealed and failed laws, whereas the database had no historic context: a law later repealed was still marked as approved for the clark it was in and not retroactively modified.
As part of my personal interests, I want to computerize the clarks published and voted on between the moment I left and now, so that we have an electronic body of law in a formal format (a wiki is en electronic body, but it is now a formal database format, I can explain the difference if you have further questions).
I do realize that any clarks from June 2004 and later that I later migrate to the database will not be official in nature unless later certified because the database was not live and is only secondary information.
But, clarks published in the database were indeed official when they were published in my capacity as SoS and constitute a primary source. For those unaware of this fact, during the period of the database, Cosa Members and Senators did not vote on Wittenberg threads, but rather in an password protected electronic form which officially and legally recorded their vote. The SoS was also authorized to record votes of Cosa Members and Senators who were not online. As such, the database is truly the primary source.
As a result, I have found at least 1 difference so far between the official record in the wiki, and the database. That difference is here: Act 32RZ1, They are Almost Talossans Too, You Know, Act
This act was proposed by me, personally. The spouse referred to in the 6th WHEREAS is the Mother of my dandelion and my Wife, who was in Wittenberg and wanted to become a citizen until Ben started his attacks.
The results and test of the law is here:
talossa.cabserver.net/files/bills.php?cosa=32&bill=1
The act was officially approved and became a law, but the WIKI lists the law as having failed.
Here are my questions to the court about this:
- Iz 32RZ1 in place?
- When the Database has, for the period for which it was official ( 28th-32th Cosa) shows a difference with the official records, can the new official records be corrected since the Database was then the official records and could be considered an historical document providing new information?
- When the database has more complete information about data predating the 28th Cosa (generally because it was information painstakenly retrieved from past SoS or former official archives), can it be used to simply supplement the official records?
- When the database show contradictory information about the data predating the 28th Cosa, who is qualified to make a decision about which record is more appropriate? Should an historical inquiry be simply launched?
- If I start adding repeal information from the current official records to the database system without changing any other information, does the Court consider this sufficient changes to invalidate the database as an historical source for the period preceding the 33th Cosa since it was modified?
- When I was maintaining the Database, I was doing so in my official duties as Secretary of State and as a result, no laws or appointments were even made to entrust me with it, which is why, when the secession occured and I was harassed, I felt like taking the database offline (but not deleting it) was my best leverage against illegal actions by a certain individual. Considering that specific case, do I now need an official mandate to build tools to help the SoS in his or her duties and so, which official mandate? Would being a special staff member of the SoS office (as mandated by 30RZ11, also written by me) constitute a mandate? Should it be instead a position under the position of Scribe of Abbavilla?
- If I continue to maintain the database in an official duty and the government/SoS later decides to use the database for official business, what happens if for some reason, I am replaced in that official duty and yet, remains the only person technical able to maintain it?
- Alternatively, could I register a corporation until Talossa law which offers the services of the Database as per a fixed contract with the government which ensures that the data contained in the database actually belongs to the government, but which recognizes the 2000 hours or so I spent building and populating the data in the database as well as future time I might spent putting it up to date and up to the standard of services that the Government/SoS expects? That way, I could official bid for offering services (not for money, mind you), as a private contractor with obligations to the country.
If there is a problem with me asking the questions (like if I need a lawyer to ask for me) feel free to let it be known. If this is not the right place, feel free to move the thread to the right place.
