Post by Danihel Laurieir on Sept 1, 2006 19:08:39 GMT -6
Fellow MCS, Senators and members of the great Talossan public:
Here are three very rough bill drafts I'd like to present to the legislature and the public at large to comment on.
The bills are—obviously, to anyone who was around for it—a response to Martuc case.
Why propose them if current law—particulary the incorporation of certain State of Wisconsin statues—was able to handle the Martuc situation?
From my perspective, there are three answers to the question:
1. Under current law it is a crime to lie or make false statements in your own application for citizenship, but it isn't crystal clear that it's a crime to try to get another application in under a forged identity or to post on Wittenberg under more than one identity.
2. While current law—thanks to our dynamic incorporation of many State of Wisconsin statutes—does provide penalties for spamming and hacking and other bad web and email behavior, Talossa's own home-written laws have nothing to say on the matter. I think it's smart to rely on Wisconsin law to cover things we haven't had to deal with or haven't thought of yet, but once we've tangled with a situation, let's put our values in our own words and write our own laws.
3. I think it's important that we make it very clear—in our own words—that Talossa will not tolerate abusive communications. Communities like ours which rely heavily on the web and email for the day to day conduct of business of exchange of opinions must—I'd argue—value civility highly, and put some teeth into that value.
Note: While I am a member of RUMP, these bill drafts have not been approved by the RUMP's politburo. This, of course, does not mean that RUMP necessarily opposes them.
Anti-Imposter and Liar Act
Clause 1: Whoever does any of the following is guilty of a crime subject to punishment by banishment, revocation of citizenship, any combination of civil disabilities and any other authorized punishments as described in 35RZ34:
(a) Makes any fraudulent or dishonest claims or statements on his or her application for citizenship, including his or her claims or statements to the Cort, the Immigration Minister and any deputies of the minister or to Cosa members.
(b) Uses another person's identity or uses an identity that creates the impression of another person to post or convey messages via email or on any public forum.
(c) Creates more than one identity for use in Talossa, excepting only name changes that replace an earlier name previously held by the same person.
Anti-Spammer and Hacker Act
Clause 1: Whoever does any of the following is guilty of a crime subject to punishment by banishment, revocation of citizenship, any combination of civil disabilities and any other authorized punishments as described in 35RZ34:
(a) Spams…Need help in defining this.
(b) Attempts on fraudulent basis to obtain passwords and/or user-id from others…Need help here, too.
(c) Attempts to, or actually does, sabotage public forums and/or the Web site…Obviously, need help here, too.
Anti-Jerk Act
Clause 1: Definition of abusive communication. Any message or form of communication that is conveyed via email, telephone or other manner or that is published in a public forum that is intended to insult, threaten or abuse a citizen or citizens and that contains words, figures, images, phrases or language that can be reasonably construed in context to be insulting, threatening or abusive may constitute abusive communication and may subject the author of such communication to the provisions outlined in this act.
Clause 2: Any citizen who receives or encounters a single instance of abusive communication (as defined in Clause 1) may petition the Cort for injunctive relief in the form of a Cort order against the author of the abusive communication to cease and desist from any similar form of communication if the petition is filed no more than five days after the Petitioner had received or encountered the alleged abusive communication. Petitions for injunctive relief from abusive communication that are received by the Cort for communications that occurred after the five-day deadline may be summarily dismissed by the Cort.
Clause 3: Whoever violates a restraining order as defined in Clause 2 is guilty of a crime subject to punishment by any combination of civil disabilities, fine, restitution and reprimand as described in 35RZ34.
Clause 4: Whoever, after having been convicted of violating the law under Clause 3 or while being tried for such violation, authors and conveys or publishes an instance of abusive communication as defined in Clause 1, is guilty of a crime subject to punishment by banishment, revocation of citizenship, any combination of civil disabilities and any other authorized punishments as described in 35RZ34.
Clause 5: If the Cort receives more than one petition for injunctive relief as described in Clause 2 that is filed against the same author, the Cort may, in addition to imposing the sought injunctive relief, also impose the punishments described in Clause 3.
Here are three very rough bill drafts I'd like to present to the legislature and the public at large to comment on.
The bills are—obviously, to anyone who was around for it—a response to Martuc case.
Why propose them if current law—particulary the incorporation of certain State of Wisconsin statues—was able to handle the Martuc situation?
From my perspective, there are three answers to the question:
1. Under current law it is a crime to lie or make false statements in your own application for citizenship, but it isn't crystal clear that it's a crime to try to get another application in under a forged identity or to post on Wittenberg under more than one identity.
2. While current law—thanks to our dynamic incorporation of many State of Wisconsin statutes—does provide penalties for spamming and hacking and other bad web and email behavior, Talossa's own home-written laws have nothing to say on the matter. I think it's smart to rely on Wisconsin law to cover things we haven't had to deal with or haven't thought of yet, but once we've tangled with a situation, let's put our values in our own words and write our own laws.
3. I think it's important that we make it very clear—in our own words—that Talossa will not tolerate abusive communications. Communities like ours which rely heavily on the web and email for the day to day conduct of business of exchange of opinions must—I'd argue—value civility highly, and put some teeth into that value.
Note: While I am a member of RUMP, these bill drafts have not been approved by the RUMP's politburo. This, of course, does not mean that RUMP necessarily opposes them.
Anti-Imposter and Liar Act
Clause 1: Whoever does any of the following is guilty of a crime subject to punishment by banishment, revocation of citizenship, any combination of civil disabilities and any other authorized punishments as described in 35RZ34:
(a) Makes any fraudulent or dishonest claims or statements on his or her application for citizenship, including his or her claims or statements to the Cort, the Immigration Minister and any deputies of the minister or to Cosa members.
(b) Uses another person's identity or uses an identity that creates the impression of another person to post or convey messages via email or on any public forum.
(c) Creates more than one identity for use in Talossa, excepting only name changes that replace an earlier name previously held by the same person.
Anti-Spammer and Hacker Act
Clause 1: Whoever does any of the following is guilty of a crime subject to punishment by banishment, revocation of citizenship, any combination of civil disabilities and any other authorized punishments as described in 35RZ34:
(a) Spams…Need help in defining this.
(b) Attempts on fraudulent basis to obtain passwords and/or user-id from others…Need help here, too.
(c) Attempts to, or actually does, sabotage public forums and/or the Web site…Obviously, need help here, too.
Anti-Jerk Act
Clause 1: Definition of abusive communication. Any message or form of communication that is conveyed via email, telephone or other manner or that is published in a public forum that is intended to insult, threaten or abuse a citizen or citizens and that contains words, figures, images, phrases or language that can be reasonably construed in context to be insulting, threatening or abusive may constitute abusive communication and may subject the author of such communication to the provisions outlined in this act.
Clause 2: Any citizen who receives or encounters a single instance of abusive communication (as defined in Clause 1) may petition the Cort for injunctive relief in the form of a Cort order against the author of the abusive communication to cease and desist from any similar form of communication if the petition is filed no more than five days after the Petitioner had received or encountered the alleged abusive communication. Petitions for injunctive relief from abusive communication that are received by the Cort for communications that occurred after the five-day deadline may be summarily dismissed by the Cort.
Clause 3: Whoever violates a restraining order as defined in Clause 2 is guilty of a crime subject to punishment by any combination of civil disabilities, fine, restitution and reprimand as described in 35RZ34.
Clause 4: Whoever, after having been convicted of violating the law under Clause 3 or while being tried for such violation, authors and conveys or publishes an instance of abusive communication as defined in Clause 1, is guilty of a crime subject to punishment by banishment, revocation of citizenship, any combination of civil disabilities and any other authorized punishments as described in 35RZ34.
Clause 5: If the Cort receives more than one petition for injunctive relief as described in Clause 2 that is filed against the same author, the Cort may, in addition to imposing the sought injunctive relief, also impose the punishments described in Clause 3.