Exiled from N'burg Indefinitely

Pretty logical, that one.

I don't see Carpet Bombing as an option, so I didn't vote.

I know your having a lot of fun in this thread and the facts are not so relevant to your purpose here, but for the benefit of those who haven't read the judegement.

- it was not a trial (it was a fact-finding hearing)
- it *was* about government officials (moreso than about Ulrika)
- the sanction is not cruel and unusual (by any stretch of the imagination)
- the sanction is not indefinite (likely by November or so she could re-apply)
- Ulrika is not actually "banned" she is merely not allowed to get citizenship for a while.

In fact the judgement contains a friendly statement about how welcome Ulrika is in Neualtenburg and how we don't really consider her a threat.

We also recommended that the other two branches of Government look into the SC's failure to remove Ulrika from her unlawful position (by Nburg law) as moderator of the Linden forum, so it's hardly a case of some "star chamber" decision as has been implied.

In regards Ulikas part of the judgement it was simply decided that since she showed such disrepect for the law of Nburg that she should think about her actions for a bit before becoming a citizen again.

How outrageous we were!

Doesn't democracy suck when it doesn't work in your favor?

Actually it for this reason that Neualtenburg was NOT a direct Democracy. Mob-rule always inflicts oppression on the weaker positioned minority.

Constitutional guarantees were in place to prevent this from happening. Guarantees the SC has seen fit to ignore in order to reach a prejudged decision to ban Ulrika from the sim.

I wish Pendari was here.

But the SC isn't required to follow the intent or literal interpretation of the constitution.

How can a fact-finding hearing culminate in a judgement?

They are required to act in the spirit and intent of the constitution. I am calling them on it.

Where do you see "They are required to act in the spirit and intent of the constitution." in the constitution? I see they are not required to interpret literally, but rather to use their personal experience to judge.

I'm not debating this with you, Kevn. I don't find you capable of debate in general.

Maybe you refuse to debate because you have no argument to counter mine.

Kevn,

The reason I refuse to debate you --is because this isn't about winning or losing arguements to me. It's about explaining my position. Your reasons for debate are not of interest to me.

Kendra

We do. But it's little more than a domain right now; all of our information is in-world. Our expansion has kept us really busy, and you yourself have demonstrated why we need thoughtful, careful control of our own media.

So I'll drop some information to your inventory next time I'm on, along with some newsletters and a fun, patriotic flag.

In a nutshell, precisely. The sims owner (me) and by extension the Steward (a landed resident with a half-month term) is quite strong now due to the demand for land, which limits the landed gentry's clout. But if land demand fades over the summer we may be as weak as a French king by August. And potentially as strong as Khan again by the winter holidays.

Right now, the Stewards mainly handle domestic issues. But in time (early 2007 at this rate) we should have enough reserves for friendly purchase of intact foreign sims, and add them to the Commonwealth.

I imagine that some of the later Stewards will greatly enjoy having a hand in negotiating such expansion. Are we Imperialist? Depends on the Steward and our financial reserves available during their term, I suppose.

Reitsuki, you are cordially invited into the reservations list and I'll see that you get information and a shot at some land if you want it.

*watches situation with interest but strategically keeps mouth shut*

Now Dianne just imagine how peaceful it would be for Neualtenburg if she was distracted by attempting a putsch in Caledon. Do I love you guys, or what?

You aren't a citizen, Ulrika.

My reason for arguing the point is to explain to you what I have been trying to explain for quite some time, that the SC's power to self-interpret and define laws and the constitution means you have absolutely no power over their judgement beyond impeachment. And we know that's a far-shot.

You insisted the SC should have this super power, until it bites you in the butt. Now you want to explain your position without defending your position.

neither are you.

Back off, Kevn. Seriously. Back off.

Why do you feel so threatened? I am only pointing out your inconsistent stance.

First you want the SC to have unregulated control. Now you want the SC to follow the literal interpretation of the constitution.

Pointing out this contradiction is not a way of cornering you. It's a way to discuss the positive and negative aspects of the constitution as it stands today.

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." ~ Lord Acton

(told ya so! told ya so!)

-Ghoti

I don't feel threatened, Kevn. I'm attempting to spare you the damage I will turn on you if you get in the middle of this. Do yourself a favor and take this as a kindness I'm extending towards you.

1. If it was just a fact-finding hearing (as I thought it was), why was a judgement passed that banned me from citizenship indefinitely?
   
2. The censure is quite unusual in not just its severity but that its duration is based upon the time that a current judge holds office. What legal system bases duration of punishment on their employees' tenure?
   
3. The ban is by definition indefinite, as judges are elected for life, leaving only by choice or changing seats through internal reorganization. There is no definite end.
   
4. Why was I illegally denied a jury as guaranteed in the constitution? Will those who denied me this right be punished as I was?

I suppose this is not a big deal if you don't mind a legal system that denies individuals a right to a trial by jury and that imposes strict sanctions of indefinite duration. To me it seems quite obvious that a kangaroo court was convened with the goal of prevent me from seeking citizenship in the immediate future.

~Ulrika~

Oh, OK, I'll just be cowering in the corner if you need me.

"The Revolution, largely based on a fervor that liberated the peasents and bourgoisie from a dreary existence, began to turn in upon itself. The hands of the new state reached up and twisted the head off of its own neck, and, cracking open the skull, ripped out the brain, searching for the passion and intellectual excitement that had sustained it in the beginning."

Eric Hobsbawm on the French Revolution

We could have the trial in person at SLCC 2006!

Like deleting posts without any concern for the rights of those who posted? a "reap what you sow" situation? One might rather call it Carma. You have been treated specially, allowing you full access to the sim, only denying you the right to buy land. I'm sure you have a few alts that can set up a home, if you haven't already.

I hope this frustrating feeling of being controlled by others will temper your manner of governance if/when you hold power in the future. You can imagine how frustrated people feel when people with power over them abuse that power. Such as deleting forum posts.

BTW, I think you did a great job in N'burg.