Proposed Constitutional Amendment : Article IV

I propose to replace the current Article IV Section 4 with:

The RA is empowered to pass laws establishing campaign regulations.


Rationale:

1) The current language is highly restrictive

a) by requiring in world avatar to avatar communication, it places at a disadvantage Europeans ans anyone else unable to be in the sim during periods of high occupancy.

b) In many ways avatar to avatar communication is the most intrusive. An email I can delete; a forum posting I can ignore. If someone pigeonholes me in world, what am I to do, run? Not very polite, if you ask me.

c) the total ban on scripted objects prevents even platform notecard dispensers. Faction platforms are supposed to be the focus of the campaign, but there's no way to legally distribute them in world.

2) Details of which campaign methods are allowed or not do not rise to the level of a constitutional concern.

It's funny. This section of the Constitution was created specifically because it was beleived that the RA couldn't be trusted with regulating its own campaigns.

1. If a body is in charge of voting on its pay, it will always approve a pay raise.
   
2. If a body is in charge of its taxes, it will always approve a tax cut.
   
3. If a body is in charge of passing laws, it will always pass laws to reduce restrictions or increase power.

This is the third attempt in less than a week to increase RA power through modifications of the Constitution.

1. There's the amendment which would allow the RA to override the Constitution, potentially creating amendments which violate the Bill of Rights.
   
2. There's the amendment that seeks to allow an undemocratic method of filling RA seats.
   
3. There's this suggestion that seeks to remove restrictions on capaigning.

The reason all these things were put in the constitution was to make them stronger than typical law to keep the RA away from them. I imagine that if the SC loses the ability to effectively veto, that these power-consolidating amendemnts will increase in volume.


It blows me away. All current amendments are directly related to power consolidation and not public service or clarification of the Constitution. I really thought it would take much longer for that to happen. If I could go back, I would significantly strengthen the Constitution agains democratic assault.

~Ulrika~

Not power consolidation, I'd say. Rather the opposite.

But at this date, I'm not even a member of the DPU, let alone any branch of government - just a simple citizen snacking on popcorn on the sidelines.

Unsubstantiated opinion is bad for consensus building. Can you make a case similar to my bulleted list to help others understand why you hold the opinion you hold?

~Ulrika~

Let's step back and look at the actual problem. Consider the following list.

Faction signs or objects which distribute platform notecards or other items

Faction signs on private property

Forum postings advocating a candidate or faction

What do they all have in common? They are all violations according to the letter of article IV, Section 4, which states:



So what? you say. Well:

Faction platforms are supposed to be at the heart of the campaign. They are explicitly required by Article IV, Section 1, yet there is no way to legally distribute them in world.

The requirement that objects be unscripted moves the emphasis from the thoughtful, fleshed out positions of a platform document to bright, colors, pretty graphics, and catchy slogans. Shouldn't it be the other way round ?

Citizens are not allowed to place ietms of political nature on their own property. So much for free expression and property rights.

In my considered opinion the framers expressed support for certain ideals (an emphasis on faction platforms and thoughtful discussion of campaign issues) then turned around and created campaign law that thoroughly undermined those ideals. I proposed a sweeping change because I believe this section of the constitution is fundamentally broken. It was a proposal, nothing more.

This is false.

Signs may distribute whatever literature it likes, as even the most simple drop script asks the avatar's permission in a dialogue box if it wishes to "keep" or "discard".
This would be appropriately viewed as "giving permission". Thus legal.
There is already a well established tradition of such signs. Faction info signs have traditionally stood outside the Rathaus where they belong.

I may certainly hang an SDF poster or whatever on my own property. There is no rule that prevents this.

The no shouting rule allows people the choice to not have to listen to campaigning by moving from the area where speechifying is taking place. Call it a rule of polite behaviour --nobody is saying one can't hold a rally in public square.

Remember also --these rules do not apply to candidates for representative office during campaign season, they are in place to keep FACTIONS from spamming new members into a form of Boss Tweed style party electioneering.

The situation you describe seems much more reasonable to me, but it's not what IV,4 says, and it's not documented in any official government document that I can find. So let's document it .We should either:

1) Change IV,4 to make explicit the things you mentioned

or

2) Ask the SC for written clarification of IV, 4 .

I disagree with your interpretation of the Article.

I believe the SC is taking up the issue next SC meeting (which is this week). So hopefully we can have some clarity about this section soon.

Since I specificially drafted that part of the Constitution, I can provide some insight on its intent. I was involved in an SL-wide election to choose the President of SL (not a real office) a couple of years back. (Yes I've been doing SL politics for years.) In the election, I had pulled ahead after two weeks of intensive door-to-door campaigning. Suddenly, at the eleventh hour, a competitor pulled ahead and won the race.

It was only a few months later, that that fellow told me he had created scripted altimeters that he dropped on newbies at telehubs that would occaisionally call out "vote for darwin if you like free stuff" with a voting URL. The voters were oblivious to the issues and merely grateful for a toy. Worse than that, the devices lived on long past the election spamming people continuously when used.

Because scripted technology in SL can be so powerful, the legislation in the constitution was created to keep campaigning polite and spam free. Further, it's to keep the election focused on the platform as opposed to the creation of the ultimate vote-getting gadget. Note that no organization or speech is excluded, rather it is the method of delivery that is regulated (no spam), which is fine.

~Ulrika~