The TalossaWiki is not a battleground Act

[Mximo Malt]

I guess you could sue yourself maybe.  If you also get yourself appointed as a judge, you could sue yourself, hear your own case, move to have yourself removed from the case, overrule your own motion, issue an injunction against yourself, and then implode into a ball of self-referential micronationalism.

Am I to understand that my question was stupid?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

I guess you could sue yourself maybe.  If you also get yourself appointed as a judge, you could sue yourself, hear your own case, move to have yourself removed from the case, overrule your own motion, issue an injunction against yourself, and then implode into a ball of self-referential micronationalism.

Am I to understand that my question was stupid?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, I'm just being silly.

[Sir Lüc]

I'm not familiar with any provision transferring administration of the wiki to the Chancery.  I'm fairly sure that it's a Propaganda or Technology issue, unless I missed a significant legal change.

The Government has never, to my knowledge, administered TalossaWiki. The Government is in charge of "official pages", but TalossaWiki has always been administered by the Chancery not by the Government. There has been no legal change because the Government has never done this, and it has been the Chancery that keeps it ticking on in the background.

Actually, I'm quite surprised to note that apparently there is no legal establishment for TalossaWiki - I don't even know who set it up! Quite apart from the noxious and authoritarian s.7 of this bill, another weakness it shows is that s.4 is entirely in the passive voice - it doesn't say who administers Talossawiki.

If the Government does want to end the ambiguity and place TalossaWiki administration within its competences, this might be a good thing - if it means setting up effective moderation and surveillance, thus removing any excuse for Government Ministers to take citizens to court for disfavored speech.

TalossaWiki has never been administered by the Chancery, it actually was a MinStuff project and theoretically was administered by the same, as long as that ministry existed anyways, although it's always been a pretty hands off thing. In the end, it's mostly been me and the King and a few other changing admins doing the little admin work there was to do.

[þerxh Sant-Enogat]

If this bill is rewritten to (a) make responsibility for administering Talossawiki unambiguous; (b) explicitly give admins/moderators of TalossaWiki authority to revert troll edits and ban repeat offenders, on the same line as the Consequences Act; (c) delete the noxious attempt to bring down the force of the Law on Wiki editors, it might prove useful.

þerxh, would you be willing to wait on sending it to the CRL?  Sorry, I know you were ready to go with it, and I should have said something earlier, but there's been a lot going on.

Of course, happy to give us all a bit more time to define a good legal framework for the administration and the moderation of our Wiki, which I think deserves a special status

@Sir Lüc , sorry for the disturbance, could you please move this bill back to the Hopper ?

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Of course, happy to give us all a bit more time to define a good legal framework for the administration and the moderation of our Wiki, which I think deserves a special status

Thank you!  Sorry about the bother.

[Sir Lüc]

@Sir Lüc , sorry for the disturbance, could you please move this bill back to the Hopper ?

Sure!