The One More Step Toward (Hopefully) Ending the Bug Wars Act

[Capt. Sir Mick Preston]

Jul 21, 2013 15:46:01 GMT -6 Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN said:

I wonder what Deputy Preston is trying to say is the relevance of s:reu Weckstrom's shenanigans to the current debate.

Who?


Initially, it was in a response to S:reu Vercáriâ comment: " In fact I cannot imagine many organizations that would be interested in challenging Talossa. "

I believe that was an example of something like that occurring before.

[Txosuè Pologn]

Jul 21, 2013 15:53:51 GMT -6 C. Carlüs Xheraltescù said:

Jul 21, 2013 15:46:01 GMT -6 Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN said:

Yes, I was in the Republic over that time frame - I know virtually nothing about this since we really didn't pay that much attention to internal Kingdom politics except where they concerned us. I wonder what Deputy Preston is trying to say is the relevance of s:reu Weckstrom's shenanigans to the current debate.

Of course, I'm supporting Live And Let Live. Simple deletion of the anti-micronation laws; a ban on membership of "hostile organisations" whether micronations or whatever.

I'm currently in touch with the ZRT's main policy-making body as well as a few supporters of our alternative proposal from outside the party. I am confident that tomorrow I will able to formally submit the final proposal to the Hopper.

I'll very much look forward to getting to see it in presentation form. It will be good to see both Bills fully fleshed out. However, I sincerely hope that we can work together enough to get one Bill a fairly universal backing. I understand that there are very strong feelings from all sides on this issue, but this issue is tearing the Kingdom apart, and must be resolved.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

I am strongly opposed to both bills. I will reluctantly support Cresti's, if only because it doesn't also spill over and repeal the Semi-Permeable Wall Act as collateral damage. That sweeps in a whole new debate and huge policy change in with this one.

[Sir C. M. Siervicül]

Jul 21, 2013 12:34:27 GMT -6 Txosuè Pologn said:

For clarification, Section 4 seems to be intended to prevent citizens of Blacklisted nations from becoming Talossans. However, at the end it says that prospective citizens must certify that they are not citizens of ANY micronation.

Good catch, that was an editing error. Fixed now.

Jul 21, 2013 6:30:51 GMT -6 C. Carlüs Xheraltescù said:

As it has been mentioned elsewhere several times that the ZRT has been working on a bill to solve some of the problems raised recently, I thought it might be helpful if I posted what we have come up with:

The Live and Let Live Act
2. Creation of a blacklist

(a) The Government shall maintain a list (hereinafter referred to as “the blacklist”) of proscribed (hereinafter referred to as “blacklisted”) organizations, any changes to which must be publicly announced. The Government shall enumerate in the list organizations which threaten the safety or tranquility of Talossa.

I see a couple of problems with the Live and Let Live Act:

1. I think you are seriously overreaching by bringing the Semi-Permeable Wall Act into this. I understand that it's in line with your party program, but you'll need votes outside the ZRT and MRPT to get something passed. There are members of the Ziu from other parties who might be willing to swallow eliminating the ban on individual participation in micronations, but will not tolerate opening the floodgates to diplomatic relations with micronations (e.g., me). My bill ought to be able to receive more votes than 44RZ24 did (and therefore pass), but I'm betting yours will receive fewer (at least mine).

2. The invocations of the Covenant of Rights & Freedoms in your bill suggest that it is based on the premise that existing law is inorganic. There are members of the Ziu who believe that 37RZ2 is organic but are open to changing the law. You risk alienating these votes as well.

[Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H.]

Jul 21, 2013 14:33:27 GMT -6 Capt. Sir Mick Preston said:

D. N. Vercáriâ:

Were you in the Kingdom during the "Republic of North Texas" incident?

Some people like to be in micronations to make laws, to run in elections.

Others are in Micronations to commit espionage, spam wars, hostile acts and eventually, try to force their victim to sign a peace treaty in which they humiliate the victim.

I used to be the ambassador to ESTO (the first UN of Micronations, which was I think a Talossan creation), and I was trying to reform it to include other micronations. I heard awful things from other peaceful micronations....

Notably, there was a micronation (which I forgot the name of) with something like 60 citizens which kept trying to send ambassadors, and to add cross-citizenship.

Once they had infiltrated another smaller micronation, they would have quickly gained the upper hand during their elections, and wreak havoc.

But the biggest problem, was that the micronation didn't really have an internal life: in reality, it really appeared as though all of the 60 citizens were fake and the creation of a single troll who wanted to make war.

One of the things other micronations I spoke to wanted the most, was a sharing of blacklists. If we have a bad experience with one, chances are that they were a bug nation.

However, my argument is only to support the creation of a black list... I am not saying all other micronations are bug nations... Just that back in 2003, there were at least 1 bug nation.

And yet, my time at ESTO showed me that most micronations simply seemed to want to be left alone to focus on their own nation building. 

In such a case, if we don't really do foreign relations, and they do not either, I don't seem the problem with dual-citizenship.

Personally, Talossa is where my heart is, so I fail to see the personal appeal, but then again, my interests with Talossa are pretty unique and atypical.

[C. Carlüs Xheraltescù]

Jul 22, 2013 3:15:21 GMT -6 Sir C. M. Siervicül said:

Jul 21, 2013 12:34:27 GMT -6 Txosuè Pologn said:

For clarification, Section 4 seems to be intended to prevent citizens of Blacklisted nations from becoming Talossans. However, at the end it says that prospective citizens must certify that they are not citizens of ANY micronation.

Good catch, that was an editing error. Fixed now.

Jul 21, 2013 6:30:51 GMT -6 C. Carlüs Xheraltescù said:

As it has been mentioned elsewhere several times that the ZRT has been working on a bill to solve some of the problems raised recently, I thought it might be helpful if I posted what we have come up with:

The Live and Let Live Act
2. Creation of a blacklist

(a) The Government shall maintain a list (hereinafter referred to as “the blacklist”) of proscribed (hereinafter referred to as “blacklisted”) organizations, any changes to which must be publicly announced. The Government shall enumerate in the list organizations which threaten the safety or tranquility of Talossa.

I see a couple of problems with the Live and Let Live Act:

1. I think you are seriously overreaching by bringing the Semi-Permeable Wall Act into this. I understand that it's in line with your party program, but you'll need votes outside the ZRT and MRPT to get something passed. There are members of the Ziu from other parties who might be willing to swallow eliminating the ban on individual participation in micronations, but will not tolerate opening the floodgates to diplomatic relations with micronations (e.g., me). My bill ought to be able to receive more votes than 44RZ24 did (and therefore pass), but I'm betting yours will receive fewer (at least mine).

2. The invocations of the Covenant of Rights & Freedoms in your bill suggest that it is based on the premise that existing law is inorganic. There are members of the Ziu who believe that 37RZ2 is organic but are open to changing the law. You risk alienating these votes as well.

Sir Cresti, I'm of the firm opinion that both these laws need to be consolidated into a single bill which concern our micronational laws. You also assume that this bill means we support like-for-like recognition, which is untrue. Micronations can exist and they should be able to get in touch with us if they want. But I'm of a strong belief that if an organisation simulating politics and nationbuilding gets in touch with our country we only extend common courtesy to them, wishing them well in their endeavours. If you exist, you exist - we needn't recognise micronations as countries. That much will be for the government to decide, and the people of Talossa may judge the government accordingly.

There is a clear alternative that we are offering here, and my decision to Hopper our bill is based on the fact that we believe our bill to be a better option. It allows the possibility, in the future, that we will come across a country of the same caliber as Talossa, and that we won't be prevented from approaching or being approached formally. There are many micronations out there that are nothing in comparison to Talossa, but I should think the Talossan people are smart enough not to elect such people who would extend formal diplomatic relations to every micronation out there.

I'm not about to oppose your bill; I sincerely hope that one of them will pass. However, I would be betraying those who supported the ZRT in the last election, not to mention those who worked tirelessly on the the bill if I did not present our work to the Ziu. Best of luck, Sir Cresti, and and you have my word that I will not move to vote down your proposal.

[Sir C. M. Siervicül]

Jul 22, 2013 5:04:10 GMT -6 C. Carlüs Xheraltescù said:

I'm not about to oppose your bill; I sincerely hope that one of them will pass. However, I would be betraying those who supported the ZRT in the last election, not to mention those who worked tirelessly on the the bill if I did not present our work to the Ziu. Best of luck, Sir Cresti, and and you have my word that I will not move to vote down your proposal.

I appreciate that, but what if both bills pass? We would have inconsistent laws on the same subject. And it seems like the possibility of both bills passing might prevent ANY bill from passing.

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

This appears to be a game of legislative chicken, then.

I endorse my party leader on this subject - I am opposed to diplomatic relations, favouring the old Penguinea/Republic style "if you exist, you exist, but we're not going to make a fancy ritual to boost your ego" attitude to other Talossa-style entities. But the Semi-Permeable Wall is another relic of the KR1 era which deserves a stake through its heart. In any case - even if the SPW were not there, I'm sure any RUMP-led government and any ZRT-led government wouldn't be interested in playing diplomatic patty-cake either. Is there any party which does want formal diplomatic relations?

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

I will be curious to see the other bill, once it is changed to fix the glaring civil liberties problem. I think CCX is working on that. Until it is changed, I'm surprised the other bill has any support, since it certainly seems to me like a bad deal for all if the government loses the ability to restrict micronational involvement but gains the power to restrict Talossan involvement in any group.

[Béneditsch Ardpresteir, O.SPM.]

I think blacklisting is a negative concept. The present system of white-listing is the best with a view of nation building. At best it can be streamlined. I guess I'll have to hopper a bill, with or without the Seneschal's consent.

[Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă]

Jul 24, 2013 14:44:59 GMT -6 Béneditsch Ardpresteir, O.SPM. said:

I think blacklisting is a negative concept. The present system of white-listing is the best with a view of nation building. At best it can be streamlined. I guess I'll have to hopper a bill, with or without the Seneschal's consent.

Oddly, i do not have to consent to you hoppering a bill, so why bring me into this at all? 

[C. Carlüs Xheraltescù]

Jul 24, 2013 13:19:57 GMT -6 Sir Alexandreu Davinescu said:

I will be curious to see the other bill, once it is changed to fix the glaring civil liberties problem. I think CCX is working on that. Until it is changed, I'm surprised the other bill has any support, since it certainly seems to me like a bad deal for all if the government loses the ability to restrict micronational involvement but gains the power to restrict Talossan involvement in any group.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that - the bill will set micronations on the same level as any other organisation outside of Talossa, as they should be. There needs to be a good reason which would directly constitute harm to other Talossans before an organisation like a micronation can be blacklisted, or so the current text reads.

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

I am unsure of the precise details, but I believe a former Seneschál of Talossa from the 1990s was recently convicted of sex offences against children. I would much rather have the option to discipline citizens for joining NAMBLA than even the stupidest bathtub nation.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

Well, of course if we're using that comparison... but that's a little obvious, isn't it? Not a whole lot of people are going to ever oppose us expelling citizens who join an odious group like NAMBLA. But let's not use that as an example, if you don't mind, because it rather shuts down debate - I'm hardly going to argue the contrary, am I?

Instead, consider most any other club or organization that might be moderately or very unpopular yet whose rights still deserve to be protected. Even aside from the questionable organicity of any statute that allows the Seneschal to declare any club or organization that disruptive or otherwise bothers the national "tranquility," that's a provision that's shockingly illiberal and hard to countenance. Trading the ability of the government to whitelist a micronation for an ability to blacklist anything? Not something I could swallow.

[Martì Prevuost]

(Said from the hallway)

Actually, I would oppose expelling a citizen who joins an odious group like NAMBLA.
While I am sickened by the very thought of what that organization stands for, either freedom of association exists or it doesn't.

Rights are not guaranteed to protect the innocuous, but the offensive.

mag