RA meeting April 26 4 pm SLT

Please submit agenda items by 8 pm SLT April 25.

If the revised referendum amendment has not already been submitted by Pelanor, consider it submitted.

, that and I'd like an SC ruling/clarification on forum moderation wrt if something like my 4-24 would be acceptable to the SC.

Pelanor, the SC is working on a forum moderation policy, which we hope to be able approve at our next regular meeting which will probably be in two weeks time if not before. The gist of the moderation policy will be that we expect people to behave according to the guidelines of netiquette put forward by Kendra Bancroft in her document entitled "The Stand". Should people fail to comply with these guidelines we will not delete or modify other persons' posts except in the rare cases where the content falls within those areas that LL demands be removed according to the forum guidelines

I have a draft copy of the guidelines as a notecard in my inventory, which I'd be happy to share with any citizen wishing to comment on the proposal. It still needs a few changes however:
o Mention the current set of SC chairs as moderators of the forum
o Make explicit the constitutional basis for forum moderation being the sole prerogative of the SC
o Incorporate Kendra's The Stand policy as the basis for netiquette
o Make explicit reference to the LL forum guidelines
o A few more changes

When the guidelines have been revised and approved by the collective SC they will be published here and moderation will subsequently be performed on that basis.

Thanks, I also know that the hearing/ruling on block impeachment of the SC hasn't happened yet, so we'll wait...

The SC hasn't stepped outside it's constitutionally granted role to rule as they see fit. They are, after all, the body that is above politics. They are legal scholars. They must not be forced to change their ruling because of intimidation. Therefore, there is no charge with which to charge them.

I also like the idea of them not responding to forum drama. You don't see John Roberts talking shop to the NYT everyday. I expect the SC to rule as they see fit and didn't mean to imply otherwise. I had thought at the last RA meeting we asked the SC for a ruling on block impeachment. This ruling may have implications for the recent referendum amendment. As it stands now, the amendment will probably be tabled.

Kevn: You imply they've already ruled against block SC impeachment. I didn't realize that, and I'll look for the text.

In the future we should probably just read the SC proceedings on the wiki. No reason to drag a SC chair to RA meetings. If they volunteer to go, that's another story. I also now understand that it's best to formally petition a chair via email for an opinion or ruling and not ask for this stuff in the forums. My apologies and please correct me if I'm mistating anything here. Thanks.

Hi Claude, sorry I missed this meeting. Was there any RA action? Is there a transcript forthcoming?....uh, was there a meeting at all?

Thanks!

Due to lack of a quorum there was no meeting.