The Wittenberg Public Use Act - A Proposal

[Antonio Montagnha, Ed. D.]

One of the small, functional priorities of my service in the upcoming Cosa is to enable groups of citizens to create their own lively groups based on interests and affinity. All healthy cultures are based on the positive interaction of such subcultural activity. 

Below you'll find a proposal for a procedure by which civic groups and non-governmental organization can request the creation of a dedicated, top-level discussion board on the Wittenberg.

Some may observe that such can be accomplished by making a request of the right person, assuming you know who that is, assuming they think it's a good idea, and assuming they choose to. While this type of ad hoc system works so long as good and diligent folks are at the switch, good government doesn't rely on such happenstance; it relies on good process, just laws, and vigilance.

Having a fair, objective, transparent process from the outset guards against arbitrary and obtuse decision making and self-dealing. It's mere existence and good practice enhances trust in the Crown and the Government.

In the name of good government, I'd like to suggest the following, very loosely based on the rules for student organization creation at the colleges and universities I have worked for in my past.

Proposed

The Wittenberg Public Use Act

WHEREAS the cultural health of the Kingdom of Talossa can be understood as the level of activity generated on the Wittenberg, specifically the level of non-political and non-governmental activity;

AND WHEREAS the most valuable actual property of the Kingdom of Talossa is the Wittenberg, and it is held in a public trust by the Crown and Government of the Kingdom of Talossa  individual, active non-governmental organizations should have regular and transparently regulated access to the utility of the board;

BE IT ENACTED by the King, Cosa and Senäts in Ziu assembled as follows:

1.   Definitions

1.1.   Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) shall be defined as a non-profit group that functions independently of the government of the Kingdom of Talossa or any political unit thereof. NGOs will serve cultural, humanitarian, civil rights, or fraternal functions and will not participate in partisan politics.

1.2.   The Wittenberg is the legal national online forum for Talossa.

2.   Goal

2.1.   To create publicly accessible, top level discussion boards for non-governmental organizations in the Kingdom of Talossa.

3.   Process

3.1.   To be granted a top-level discussion board, an online application form must be completed and submitted to the Minister of Culture. The form must ask for:

3.1.1.   Name of the Organization

3.1.2.   Proposed Title of the Board, which must reflect the true name of the organization

3.1.3.   A fifty-word statement on the purpose of the organization, which cannot be at odds with any guarantee of civil rights to kingdom citizens.

3.1.4.   A list of five Talossa citizens who are members of the organization and are willing to confirm their membership to the Ministry of Culture.

3.1.5.   A commitment to run the organization in a democratic fashion and to accept any citizen of the Kingdom of Talosaa as member of the organization, and apply all membership standards, such as membership fees, to all persons, equally.

3.1.6.   Having affirmed the information contained in the application, the Minister of Culture or their designated plenipotentiary must direct the responsible officer of the Kingdom's government or civil service to create said top-level discussion board on the Wittenberg.

4.   Review and Revocation

4.1.   On July 1 and December 1 of each year the Minister of Culture or their designated plenipotentiary must review the level of activity in each NGO discussion board. If the average activity is less than four posts per month in the period since the most recent such review, the NGO board in question will be archived and removed from the main page. The board may be restored to public access on the main page by using the application process defined in section three of this act.

   

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

This should probably be presented as an amendment to our legal code, el Lexhatx, not a stand-alone bill.  There haven't been any independent bills beyond ephemeral ones for some years now.

I also think that the process for review is way too much.  I'd suggest that you might want to simplify and just specify the definition of an NGO and legal requirements for its registration as a corporation, and then add in a bit to title Z noting that NGOs can request boards be created for them at the discretion of the Chancery, with the average post rate criteria added as nonbinding advice to the Chancery.

EDIT: Sorry, I hadn't realized that the Bureau of Corporations was eliminated by Miestra a couple of years ago.  It's been replaced with a promotional thing -- "Register of Talossan Enterprises."  I plan on reintroducing the Bureau of Corporations and its associated trappings (https://wiki.talossa.com/Law:Incorporation_Act_of_Corporative_Corporations).

EDIT2: Okay, reintroduced it: https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=1401.msg11677#msg11677  If you'd like, I'd be happy to work with you on a combined bill which would include your provisions.

[Ian Plätschisch]

Given that admins have traditionally been happy to create new boards when asked, I tend to think we do not need this law at all.

[Antonio Montagnha, Ed. D.]

Good legislation does not make rules for the ideal now or the best operators, rather it seeks to eliminate the opportunity for for maleficence and self-serving actors; not because our current administrators are so inclined but because it is well inside of common human behavior to do so. Better to legislate the barn door closed before letting the tyrant our of the barn. 

[Ian Plätschisch]

Good legislation does not make rules for the ideal now or the best operators, rather it seeks to eliminate the opportunity for for maleficence and self-serving actors; not because our current administrators are so inclined but because it is well inside of common human behavior to do so. Better to legislate the barn door closed before letting the tyrant our of the barn.

I'm not sure how that applies here. The worst case scenario seems to be that future admins will refuse to create new subforums; if that ever happens we could pass a bill to deal with it then.

[Antonio Montagnha, Ed. D.]

Why wait for something bad to happen before you create a process to mitigate it? In my experience that is problematic practice. One of the goals of leadership to to mitigate "black swans" or outside context problems from happening. That is not done by waiting for something bad to happen before you attempt to fix it.

Good legislation does not make rules for the ideal now or the best operators, rather it seeks to eliminate the opportunity for for maleficence and self-serving actors; not because our current administrators are so inclined but because it is well inside of common human behavior to do so. Better to legislate the barn door closed before letting the tyrant our of the barn.

I'm not sure how that applies here. The worst case scenario seems to be that future admins will refuse to create new subforums; if that ever happens we could pass a bill to deal with it then.

[Ian Plätschisch]

In the insurance industry, the risk of "rogue admins not approving new subforums" would probably be referred to as low frequency, low severity:
-It probably won't happen
-If it does happen, the consequences aren't that bad (an organization has to use a different subforum until the situation is addressed)

The response to low frequency, low severity risks is usually to do nothing, because any proactive response would be unjustifiably costly. In this case, we would be imposing a complex process on everyone when it isn't necessary.

Note especially that while black swans are low frequency but very high severity, this risk is low severity as described above.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

Just wondering whether the proposer thinks this is ready to go before the CRL yet?