Ruling [Question] OOC Bans gameside

[Domais]

Twelfth Mandate of Lazarus authorizes OOC Administration to the Root Admin off-site, yet it fails to do so gameside. Since it fails to do this all bans gameside are inherently IC as there is no law to the contrary. Therefore, such bans must follow the IC laws of Lazarus. In this way, if a spammer were to appear on the RMB no BC officer would be authorized to ban them in the absence of a vote in the CLS. As the Delegate's power to ban is expressly limited by the Mandate. Therefore, it would be unlawful to remove said spammer without a law expressly authorizing such bans.

Furthermore, "The Delegate may, subject to confirmation by 50%+1 vote of the Council on Lazarene Security, impose revocation of citizenship, ejection and/or ban from Lazarus, or other measures to preserve the security and stability of Lazarus, for whatever duration of time is determined appropriate. The Assembly may overturn such decisions by three-quarters vote." must apply to non-citizens because of the wording of the text. As it must be read as "The Delegate may, subject to confirmation by 50%+1 vote of the Council on Lazarene Security impose ejection and/or ban from Lazarus" without the comas.

The question is does the court agree with this interpretation of the Mandate? If not how do they interpret the Mandate on these issues?

 

[McChimp]

I would like to weigh in on this. I was under the impression that this clause:

"The Delegate may, subject to confirmation by 50%+1 vote of the Council on Lazarene Security, impose revocation of citizenship, ejection and/or ban from Lazarus, or other measures to preserve the security and stability of Lazarus, for whatever duration of time is determined appropriate. The Assembly may overturn such decisions by three-quarters vote." must apply to non-citizens because of the wording of the text. As it must be read as "The Delegate may, subject to confirmation by 50%+1 vote of the Council on Lazarene Security impose ejection and/or ban from Lazarus"

applies only to citizens. This makes practical sense, since it means that if somebody's OOC conduct is unacceptable then they are either:

1: a non-citizen and can be removed by anybody with the power to do so at will

or

2: a citizen to whom off-site administration applies

and can therefore be removed as required in all cases.

 

[Domais]

I would like to weigh in on this. I was under the impression that this clause:

"The Delegate may, subject to confirmation by 50%+1 vote of the Council on Lazarene Security, impose revocation of citizenship, ejection and/or ban from Lazarus, or other measures to preserve the security and stability of Lazarus, for whatever duration of time is determined appropriate. The Assembly may overturn such decisions by three-quarters vote." must apply to non-citizens because of the wording of the text. As it must be read as "The Delegate may, subject to confirmation by 50%+1 vote of the Council on Lazarene Security impose ejection and/or ban from Lazarus"

applies only to citizens, since the first item on the list may only be imposed on somebody who has citizenship. This would makes practical sense, since it means that if somebody's OOC conduct is unacceptable then either they are:

1: a non-citizen and can be removed by anybody with the power to do so at will

2 a citizen to whom off-site administration applies

and can therefore be removed as required in all cases.

If we accept such interpretation, off-site administration only applies off-site, therefore, a vote of the CLS or other law would be needed to remove them ingame.

 

[Eldarion]

A lot of language on the RMB can be considered OOC by the game itself. Racist messages, porn, spam, and such is already considered an OOC offense by in-game moderators, that can be reported, and regions like Lazarus generally act against spam under the assumption that it is universally frowned upon game-wide, to the point many regions including Lazarus consider it an implied power of the Delegate and the ROs they appoint with ban powers. Whether that is stated in the mandate or not by this passage though I guess is in consideration, but everyone acted with the assumption it didn't need to be stated in the mandate to do so.

 

[McChimp]

If we accept such interpretation, off-site administration only applies off-site, therefore, a vote of the CLS or other law would be needed to remove them ingame.

No, since the interpretation specifically denies non-citizens the implicit protection of that clause. If they are not a citizen they may be removed at will without process.

 

[Clorinda]

Why does this need codified at all. It’s a no-brainer.

 

[Chanku]

The court has unanimously agreed to the following opinion

Article II, Section 5 of Mandate 12 states:

(5) The Delegate may, subject to confirmation by 50%+1 vote of the Council on Lazarene Security, impose revocation of citizenship, ejection and/or ban from Lazarus, or other measures to preserve the security and stability of Lazarus, for whatever duration of time is determined appropriate. The Assembly may overturn such decisions by three-quarters vote.

This section applies to Citizens and Residents alike, however the Delegate may take action prior to the confirmation by the CLS, so long as it is either for an blatant and immediate security issue in which any delay would cause irreparable harm or that the action does not interfere, suppress, or otherwise unlawfully limit the individual's right to partake in constitutionally protected actions and activity. This ruling is not retroactive and the CLS is not required to apply this standard to actions undertaken prior to this ruling, as the CLS had acted with clean hands in applying the law at the time. The Court can not rule on the OOC parts of this question, as it is beyond the power of our government to consider, in accordance with prior rulings which prohibit the government from considering ooc issues or acting on them.