Osiris Fraternal Order

Posted: **Mon Dec 26, 2016 6:43 pm**

Code of Rights Act Section 1: Amendment to the Legal Code of the Osiris Fraternal Order

(1) The following will be amended into the Legal Code of the Osiris Fraternal Order as Article V:

Amendment Text wrote:Article V: Code of Rights

Section 1: Rights of Residents

(1) Residents are defined as persons maintaining nations in the region Osiris.
(2) Residents will enjoy freedom of expression, speech, association, and the press, which may only be limited by applicable NationStates rules, forum terms of service, and laws or policies that reasonably serve to preserve the security and order of the region, its community, or its government. Advertisement for other regions or organizations will not be construed to be protected expression or speech.
(3) Residents may petition for the redress of grievances when they believe a law or government action contradicts the Scroll of Ma'at or laws enacted pursuant to the Scroll of Ma'at. Such petitions will be heard and resolved by the Pharaoh.
(4) Residents may appeal rejection of citizenship applications to the Council of Guardians, which will hear and resolve a resident's appeal within seven days of filing by either upholding rejection of the resident's citizenship application or overturning it and admitting the resident to citizenship. Appeals neglected for more than seven days will automatically go to vote before the Council of Scribes.
(5) Residents will be protected against banning of their nations from Osiris absent the approval of the Council of Guardians. The Pharaoh may ban or authorize the banning of a resident nation which poses an imminent threat to the security of Osiris prior to obtaining the approval of the Council of Guardians, but must obtain such approval within seven days of imposing the ban.
(6) Residents may participate in the regional forum of Osiris without citizenship, but may be limited from participating in subforums that are restricted to citizen participation with reasonable cause.
(7) Residents will be protected against ban from the regional forum of Osiris, except as an exercise of the power granted to regional forum administration by the Scroll of Ma'at.
(8) Residents will enjoy the freedom to maintain World Assembly nations in Osiris and to exchange World Assembly endorsements, up to a limit of 10 endorsements for nations not endorsing the Pharaoh and a limit of 100 endorsements fewer than the Pharaoh for nations endorsing the Pharaoh.
(9) Residents will enjoy the freedom for their nations in Osiris to decline to endorse or to withdraw their endorsements from any other nation, provided they remain in compliance with legally prescribed endorsement limits.
(10) Residents and their nations in Osiris will be protected against penalization for another resident's violation of endorsement limits.

Section 2: Rights of Citizens

(1) Citizens are defined as persons who have been approved for citizenship according to legal procedure established for such approval and who are in compliance with legal requirements of citizenship.
(2) All rights granted to residents, and any corresponding limitations, will also be extended to citizens.
(3) Citizens will be protected against revocation of citizenship except according to legal procedure established for such revocation.
(4) Citizens will enjoy the right to vote in the Council of Scribes and in all elections, limited only by legal restrictions. Any vote cast by a citizen who no longer maintains citizenship at the conclusion of voting will be invalidated.
(5) Citizens will enjoy the right to stand for election to any elected office, provided they meet legal requirements established for candidacy.
(6) Citizens will enjoy the freedom to maintain World Assembly nations in Osiris and to exchange World Assembly endorsements, up to a limit of 20 endorsements for nations not endorsing the Pharaoh and a limit of 75 endorsements fewer than the Pharaoh for nations endorsing the Pharaoh.

Long overdue creation of a comprehensive bill of rights, which will be amended into the Legal Code rather than the Scroll of Ma'at so that we can more easily amend rights that may present any complications. I trust that these rights are all fairly self-explanatory, but if anyone has questions about a particular right and what it means, feel free to bring those up and I'll be glad to answer them.

I should note that the proposed Article V, Section 1(4) will require the creation of a new forum masking for residents, but that shouldn't be too difficult as we could either duplicate the guest visa or just turn the rarely used guest visa into a resident masking. This seems like a change that would encourage more residents to participate via the forum, as some do via Discord, without being subjected to the activity requirements of citizenship.

Finally, to address what could be a more pertinent issue, the Pharaoh's power to set regional security policy -- including endorsement limits -- is subordinate to regional law, according to Article III, Section 1(5) of the Scroll of Ma'at. Standardized limits for residents and citizens, at a higher limit than we currently have, will encourage more residents and citizens to exchange endorsements, which in turn will make Osiris safer by making it more difficult for a rogue Delegate and any collaborators to eject and/or ban nations that continue to endorse the legal Pharaoh, Heir Apparent, and Guardians. It's basically a win-win. We may want to talk about whether we want separate limits for residents and citizens as I've drafted them, or whether we would prefer the same limit for all residents. Personally, I think a separate, higher limit for citizens will encourage citizenship and that it's better to entrust citizens who have been security verified with a higher limit than to entrust the higher limit to all residents.

Thoughts?

Posted: **Mon Dec 26, 2016 6:55 pm**

"Citizens will enjoy the freedom to maintain World Assembly nations in Osiris and to exchange World Assembly endorsements, up to a limit of 20 endorsements for nations not endorsing the Pharaoh and a limit of 75 endorsements fewer than the Pharaoh for nations endorsing the Pharaoh."

So is the endorsement count changed?

Posted: **Mon Dec 26, 2016 7:33 pm**

Dr_PelIcaN wrote:Mon Dec 26, 2016 11:55 pm"Citizens will enjoy the freedom to maintain World Assembly nations in Osiris and to exchange World Assembly endorsements, up to a limit of 20 endorsements for nations not endorsing the Pharaoh and a limit of 75 endorsements fewer than the Pharaoh for nations endorsing the Pharaoh."

So is the endorsement count changed?

As explained on Discord, based on the Pharaoh's current endorsement count, this is how the endorsement limits affected by this legislation would look:

Residents not endorsing the Pharaoh: 10
Citizens not endorsing the Pharaoh: 20
Residents endorsing the Pharaoh: 83
Citizens endorsing the Pharaoh: 108

Like the Guardian and Heir Apparent limits -- which are not affected by this legislation -- the limits for residents and citizens endorsing the Pharaoh would fluctuate according to the Pharaoh's endorsement count, as they are set at, respectively, 100 endorsements fewer than the Pharaoh and 75 endorsements fewer than the Pharaoh. The limits for residents and citizens not endorsing the Pharaoh would not change and are fixed at, respectively, 10 and 20 endorsements.

Posted: **Mon Dec 26, 2016 9:40 pm**

Is this where I politely point out that the vast majority of those rights were once given to us and were removed by you, yourself, Cormac? So that you could ban The Grey Wardens and other people who challenged your rule or your views? In fact, after the State of Emergency, you very specifically did *not* return those rights, as you believed that the establishment of these rights allowed opposition to build within the region that could some day overthrow the Pharaoh.

It really does seem like you loved your unchecked power, but after you abandoned us, you decided that maybe the next guy shouldn't have the same rights you did. I find it incredibly difficult to believe that you're passing these for the good of anyone, and are instead, to some extent, wishing to weaken the institution that you so vehemently have opposed in private and public ever since your abdication.

Posted: **Mon Dec 26, 2016 9:59 pm**

I'm very much against the idea of hard coded numbers for endorsements (at least ones this high). Considering the hurdles it would take to change those, I can't see it being a positive change. Beyond that, the idea that, during a conflict, the Pharoah would need to seek approval on each individual banned nation is kind of insane.

Beyond the security issues above, I'm not exactly thrilled with the idea of guaranteeing that many rights to someone just because they move a puppet into the region. Finding a balance between integrating our ingame population and also giving them the space they need to play as they'd like is a good thing, but this goes way too far towards their favor.

On the whole, I think this goes too far too quickly and I can't really see myself supporting it in its current form. Maybe I could support a much weaker version? But I'd have to see it first.

Posted: **Mon Dec 26, 2016 10:28 pm**

I've had quite a busy night, so this will be brief and I may add something later.

Syberis does indeed make a good point, but after reviewing this amendment, I believe it is quite beneficial as it establishes an official endorsement count dependent on whether you are participating in endorsing the Pharaoh or not. The current Legal Code does not include anything (besides the Line of Succession [Article III Section 2]) regarding endorsement count.

Posted: **Tue Dec 27, 2016 1:21 am**

Syberis wrote:Tue Dec 27, 2016 2:40 amIs this where I politely point out that the vast majority of those rights were once given to us and were removed by you, yourself, Cormac? So that you could ban The Grey Wardens and other people who challenged your rule or your views? In fact, after the State of Emergency, you very specifically did *not* return those rights, as you believed that the establishment of these rights allowed opposition to build within the region that could some day overthrow the Pharaoh.

It really does seem like you loved your unchecked power, but after you abandoned us, you decided that maybe the next guy shouldn't have the same rights you did. I find it incredibly difficult to believe that you're passing these for the good of anyone, and are instead, to some extent, wishing to weaken the institution that you so vehemently have opposed in private and public ever since your abdication.

Let's get past the ridiculous and misleading hyperbole, particularly the talk of abandonment like you're helpless children and I'm the deadbeat dad, and get into the meat of your complaint. If you think I abused my power so badly, and if you acknowledge that leaving the law as-is will allow Neo Kervoskia or some future Pharaoh to abuse his power similarly if not worse than you claim I did, then wouldn't that be reason to change the law to impose more limitations and oversight? What am I missing?

Treize Dreizehn wrote:Tue Dec 27, 2016 2:59 amI'm very much against the idea of hard coded numbers for endorsements (at least ones this high). Considering the hurdles it would take to change those, I can't see it being a positive change. Beyond that, the idea that, during a conflict, the Pharoah would need to seek approval on each individual banned nation is kind of insane.

Our current law allows the Delegate to ban any resident, including citizens, without any limitation or oversight. Maybe I've gone too far in my proposed language, but let's talk about how to fix that, let's not just assume the status quo of letting the Delegate ban whoever he wants, whenever he wants, without any recourse for the person banned is acceptable. If we're going to do that, let's just repeal all the laws and let the Delegate be our dictator, like in the NPO. It would be more honest.

In regard to the endorsement limits, would you prefer to set a lower endorsement limit? If so, what limit? Again, let's talk about the status quo, which is what you're advocating by opposing my proposed language but not proposing any alternative. The status quo is that the Delegate can set the endorsement limit for anyone in Osiris who is not a Guardian or the Heir Apparent at zero. There is absolutely no legal obstacle to the Delegate doing that, and he would not be breaking the law if he did it. Is that acceptable to you?

Treize Dreizehn wrote:Tue Dec 27, 2016 2:59 amBeyond the security issues above, I'm not exactly thrilled with the idea of guaranteeing that many rights to someone just because they move a puppet into the region. Finding a balance between integrating our ingame population and also giving them the space they need to play as they'd like is a good thing, but this goes way too far towards their favor.

Well, we could perhaps talk about switching some of the rights of residents to citizens instead. Which do you think aren't appropriate for residents? I can't see a single one on either list that isn't at least appropriate for citizens.

Treize Dreizehn wrote:Tue Dec 27, 2016 2:59 amOn the whole, I think this goes too far too quickly and I can't really see myself supporting it in its current form. Maybe I could support a much weaker version? But I'd have to see it first.

You can't see it if you don't tell me what you think needs done for it to be weaker and acceptable to you. I'm happy to compromise, but I can't compromise with "This is bad, I don't like it" because that tells me nothing about what you would support.

Sygian wrote:Tue Dec 27, 2016 3:28 amI've had quite a busy night, so this will be brief and I may add something later.

Syberis does indeed make a good point, but after reviewing this amendment, I believe it is quite beneficial as it establishes an official endorsement count dependent on whether you are participating in endorsing the Pharaoh or not. The current Legal Code does not include anything (besides the Line of Succession [Article III Section 2]) regarding endorsement count.

Exactly. I'm happy to compromise on details, but surely we can all agree that the status quo of absolutely no regulation for things like endorsement limits, banning of residents, etc., isn't a desirable situation.

For those concerned that I'm doing this because I don't trust NK with unlimited power over endorsement limits, banning, etc., you're not wrong, and in his history he has given me every reason not to trust him with unlimited power. But you don't have to have a pessimistic view of NK to see the wisdom in not allowing the Pharaoh unlimited power. Don't ask yourself how you felt about me wielding that much power, or how you feel about NK or Syberis wielding it. Ask yourself how you feel about a Pharaoh two or three abdications from now, a Pharaoh you may not even have met yet, wielding that much power. And then let's talk about compromises if you feel this is too excessive, but let's not talk about doing nothing until we've got a Pharaoh who will flagrantly and egregiously abuse power that is almost completely unchecked. Because by then it will be too late to even bother talking about it.

Posted: **Sat Dec 31, 2016 4:31 am**

I motion to vote

Posted: **Sat Dec 31, 2016 4:39 am**

I would rather hold off until after the current constitutional revision draft proposed by the Pharaoh is finished.

Posted: **Mon Jan 02, 2017 1:11 pm**

I agree and withdraw my motion to vote

Osiris Fraternal Order

[Withdrawn] Code of Rights Act

[Withdrawn] Code of Rights Act

[Withdrawn] Code of Rights Act

[Withdrawn] Code of Rights Act

[Withdrawn] Code of Rights Act

[Withdrawn] Code of Rights Act

[Withdrawn] Code of Rights Act

[Withdrawn] Code of Rights Act

[Withdrawn] Code of Rights Act

[Withdrawn] Code of Rights Act

[Withdrawn] Code of Rights Act