+- Forums (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum)
+-- Forum: Second Floor (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=112)
+--- Forum: Board Meeting Room (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=19)
+---- Forum: Past Proposals & Discussions (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=50)
+---- Thread: Security Reviews Amendment (2020) (/showthread.php?tid=1526)
Security Reviews Amendment (2020) - New Rogernomics - 06-18-2020
Security Reviews Amendment (2020)
Proposed by: @"New Rogernomics"
Proposed by: @"New Rogernomics"
Preamble
This amendment shall enable for the establishing of a formal process for security reviews of those banished from Lazarus.
Section 1. Amendment of the Twelfth Mandate of Lazarus
(1) Section VI. Council of Lazarene Security shall be amended to also include:
Quote:Security Reviews
(1) The Council of Lazarene Security shall permit security reviews of the regional ban list related to in-game activity, within 6 months of banishment, if so ordered by the Court of Lazarus.
(2) In process of a security review, the Court of Lazarus shall review evidence of good character to be presented to the Council of Lazarene Security, giving their approval for the review to go ahead. The procedures for approving of a review may be established by a two thirds vote of the Assembly.
(3) Revoking banishment by process of security review shall require a 50%+1 vote of the Council of Lazarene Security to be implemented, and approval of the Delegate of Lazarus.
RE: Security Reviews Amendment (2020) - Domais - 06-18-2020
Can you further explain this?
RE: Security Reviews Amendment (2020) - New Rogernomics - 06-18-2020
Domais;9882 Wrote:Can you further explain this?
This would obligate the Council of Lazarene Security to hear reviews on banishment decisions it may have made in the past.
The Court of Lazarus would have procedures to collect and review the evidence of good character to pass on, which either the Court will decide themselves, or these procedures can be defined by the assembly in law.
That step should be a simple matter of a petition to the court, and the procedures could either be simply passing it on, or more extensive like the court voting to approve it. That would have to be determined by the court or the assembly in law as that too would be part of court procedures.
After that the CLS would review the evidence and vote, and the Delegate has to sign off on CLS decisions so that is noted as well.
RE: Security Reviews Amendment (2020) - Domais - 06-18-2020
Then I support this.
RE: Security Reviews Amendment (2020) - McChimp - 06-18-2020
I don't see the point. It doesn't give anybody any authority that they don't already have.