Court Post [Case Closed]

Prosecutor: Jeep, (possibly Nighthawk and Aj)

Accused: Pzk

Crime: Propaganda against Ismail, attempting to undermine his chances in the Presidential vote, Insulting higher officers, disobeying orders.

Judge: Nickman101

Evidence against Accused:

As you can see here, he is blatantly undermining his opponents chance of winning.
I deleted his propaganda.
Here he undeletes it, and even insults a superior officer.
Here I have redeleted it as well as shown him which laws he is breaking, and giving him a warning to stop before things go downhill.
He restores it.

 

Telling you to stop breaking laws is a ridiculous order now, is it?

 

Laws potentially broken:

2. Do not follow corrupt ways to achieve higher ranks. Only give or acquire a rank in the GSA through legal means, and do not give or acquire ranks because of blackmail/bribery/extortion. (P: 2nd Degree)

31. The creation of Political Parties or organizations of voters who vote together to override others is illegal. (P: 1st degree on the leader of any such organization.)

32. Candidates running for any position within the Government cannot ask members for their vote specifically or personally. Neither can any member be individually pressured to vote or vote a certain way on any public vote. (P: 1st degree, removed from election.)

43. You cannot ask for a promotion, nor can you participate in any sort of bribery/blackmail or other insidious strategy to acquire a promotion as well. If you of the ranks recruit-sergeant you may ask for a promotion however.

[Nickman101]: I am going to discount the above laws from the trial because Pzk does not explicitly go as far as to even mention the election in his post. For all we know it was comletely unrelated to the election, even though there were strong indirect references based on the time and situation of the election.

1. Treat all members with respect. Do not harm fellow GSA members, or threaten them in any way to damage them.  (P: Warning or Probation from communicative services. I.E. The GSA chat, or in special cases for the dangering other members part, 3rd degree.)

[Nickman101:] Yes, this law applies. 

11. You must follow all orders given by a superior officer within the GSA, unless they infringe upon your rights or break the law. (P: 1st or 2nd degree.)

[Nickman101:] This law applies.

Evidence in favor of accused:

Pzk’s argument:

I will address the laws broken first, since they are the basis for most of Jeep’s argument. Law 2: I had not performed any act of blackmail, bribery, or extortion, in any way you could have interpreted my post. As a note I added at the end of the post that it was a satire. Law 31: I didn’t create a political party at all. I made a satirical post. Law 32: I didn’t ask anyone for their vote individually or generally. If someone interpreted it in a way that would make it more likely for them to vote for me, it would still not be against this law, since it would be their interpretation, not my post, that caused that behavior. I didn’t ask for a promotion, which isn’t even related to election anyway. I made a satirical post. Law 1: I put no GSA members in danger, and I never actually called you thick. You were apparently thick based on the way you were reacting, but it was still a gray area on whether or not you were actually thick. Law 11: Since your order had no legal basis (as I displayed above), I actually use that law myself to disobey your orders, since it infringes on my rights of free speech.

[Nickman101:] You don’t seem to be treating Ismail respectfully by making that post, which I do not know is true or false.

[Nickman101:] He is completely authorized to give that order because he is your commanding officer and the order does not violate any GSA laws. The liberty that all members have that allows freedom of speech is presented here:

  • Third Right: The right to speak freely, without the permission of a higher rank or the CEO. This may be temporarily revoked if ordered upon by a superior officer, if he/she has good cause. This does not give you the power to insult people. Calmly give an opinion.

In this situation, Jeepdino had probable cause to delete your post, as he believed that you violated multiple laws in posting it. 

In fact, you are the one subject to punishment by the law. You deleted my post twice without any legal jurisdiction, you threatened me multiple times in the chat, attempted to extort me and force me to not request this court post, and intimidated me. You took away my editor, (albeit from some license from Nick), conducted a trial about this with Nick without my representation, and attempted to remove me from the race. This, unlike your accusations, IS punishable by law.

[Nickman101:] In this trial you are the defendant, conduct a new trial if you wish to press charges against Jeepdino, otherwise I will not pass my opinion on what you have just said.

I have to admit, I know that asking for this post to be made is complete political suicide and is probably not going to be effective. I have been informed that the sway of most of the FG, and the supposedly unbiased CL that we have, is already against me. For that reason, I would like to request a different judge based on Nick’s alleged previous involvement with the case. I would rather do this trial using the democratic process than submit to coercion.

[Nickman101:] I will conduct a fair trial, and I do not know any individual who has the capability of using the laws (that I largely created myself), effectively. In the past Tethys dodged a criminal conviction even though my opinion outside of the court was that she had committed a crime. 

P.S: If I truly wanted to create a post about slander, there is no law to stop me. It is not necessarily disrespectful, it isn’t asking for votes, it isn’t creating a political machine, it isn’t nefarious (at least based on every campaign in history), and it is legal and protected my my civil rights. If you would like to propose a law against slander you are free to do so, since this is a democratic clan with democratic facilities. But for now, don’t use that against me.

[Nickman101:] How is slander not disrespectful? Merriam Webster:

1slan·der

transitive verb \ˈslan-dər\

: to make a false spoken statement that causes people to have a bad opinion of someone

That is disrespectful within its definition.

Anyhow, the solidity of the law is not what is on trial here.

FOR THE REST OF THE ARGUMENT, CHECK THE COMMENTS.

Requested punishment: Disqualification from the Presidential election.

Nickman101’s Ruling:

The valid laws that Pzk is charged of violating are:

Law 11 and 13 (Which are synonymous, so I suppose I will have to delete one of them.)

Law 47  (Which I will discount from the trial because the Post Rules are still being crafted and tempered.)

and Law 1.

Reasoning:

Law 1 has been violated because the post that Pzk sent was directed towards Ismail and was disrespectful towards him, however Pzk must provide more evidence that his post was meant to be satirical and must be heavily related to an outside subject, otherwise the court will rule him guilty of this charge, and he will be temporarily revoked of membership in the GSA chat for a period of three days. If Jeepdino was insulted then he will have to come up with new evidence to support such a claim, and Pzk’s explanation as to whether he actually insulted Jeepdino or not doesn’t make any sense logically. Therefore, whether Pzk violated law 1 is now on hold.

There is hard evidence that Jeepdino ordered Pzk multiple times to delete his post as he believed that he had good reason for him to delete the post, and this consitutes a 1st or 2nd degree sentence, however I will wave this because Pzk was not supposed to have editor in the first place. Pzk should not be the president right now nor should he have had any of the privileges of the President, which includes the privilege of having editor on the website. Therefore Jeep was justified in taking away Pzk’s editorship, and we should have done this much earlier then when Pzk put out his post. Therefore, Pzk’s punishment is for him to be removed of the rank of President, Ownership on the GSA chat, and editorship on the website (Which is what was already should have been done, and why the punishment for breaking this law is nullified.) The members of the FG (Besides me), cannot order the President to do something, so even if Pzk was the president, he would not be breaking laws either.

Judgement: 

Pzk will be removed of presidential status, revoked his Editorship on the GSA site, and revoked his ownership on the GSA chat. (Which should have already happened since he isn’t president anymore.)

Whether or not Pzk is guestbanned for three days on the GSA chat is up to whether he can prove that his statement was meant to be satirical and whether or not Jeep has any evidence of him being insulted by Pzk.

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

47 thoughts on “Court Post [Case Closed]

  1. I will address the laws broken first, since they are the basis for most of Jeep’s argument. Law 2: I had not performed any act of blackmail, bribery, or extortion, in any way you could have interpreted my post. As a note I added at the end of the post that it was a satire. Law 31: I didn’t create a political party at all. I made a satirical post. Law 32: I didn’t ask anyone for their vote individually or generally. If someone interpreted it in a way that would make it more likely for them to vote for me, it would still not be against this law, since it would be their interpretation, not my post, that caused that behavior. I didn’t ask for a promotion, which isn’t even related to election anyway. I made a satirical post. Law 1: I put no GSA members in danger, and I never actually called you thick. You were apparently thick based on the way you were reacting, but it was still a gray area on whether or not you were actually thick. Law 11: Since your order had no legal basis (as I displayed above), I actually use that law myself to disobey your orders, since it infringes on my rights of free speech.

    In fact, you are the one subject to punishment by the law. You deleted my post twice without any legal jurisdiction, you threatened me multiple times in the chat, attempted to extort me and force me to not request this court post, and intimidated me. You took away my editor, (albeit from some license from Nick), conducted a trial about this with Nick without my representation, and attempted to remove me from the race. This, unlike your accusations, IS punishable by law.

    I have to admit, I know that asking for this post to be made is complete political suicide and is probably not going to be effective. I have been informed that the sway of most of the FG, and the supposedly unbiased CL that we have, is already against me. For that reason, I would like to request a different judge based on Nick’s alleged previous involvement with the case. I would rather do this trial using the democratic process than submit to coercion.

    P.S: If I truly wanted to create a post about slander, there is no law to stop me. It is not necessarily disrespectful, it isn’t asking for votes, it isn’t creating a political machine, it isn’t nefarious (at least based on every campaign in history), and it is legal and protected my my civil rights. If you would like to propose a law against slander you are free to do so, since this is a democratic clan with democratic facilities. But for now, don’t use that against me.

    1. 2. Extortion ect. is merely the second part of the law, the first and main part says “DO NOT FOLLOW CORRUPT WAYS TO ACHIEVE HIGHER RANKS”.

      31. You were lying, making people think Ismail isn’t good for the Presidency and to vote against him, sounds like making a group to me.

      32. You pressured them to think a certain way. … Did you just say that if your post made them think a certain way, it was their fault? lol wtf? So if I give a 5 year old a gun and he shoots someone, it’s the 5 year old’s fault?

      43. You cannot ask for a promotion, nor can you participate in any sort of bribery/blackmail or OTHER INSIDIOUS STRATEGY to acquire a promotion as well.

      1. You’re beating around the bush so much that it isn’t even funny. If I look at someone and say “You must be stupid”. I’m not calling them stupid? What kind of logic is this?

      11. Your right of speech does not include posting needless propaganda on another GSA member. You broke laws, I told you to stop, you didn’t.

      Alright now this is getting funny.

      1. I have every legal jurisdiction, 5-6 of them in fact.
      2. I didn’t threaten you, I told you that you had a choice, you could either stop or be punished.
      3. Force and intimidate? What? xD I told you that a court case would be stupid because all possible judges have already seen what’s happened and already have an opinion and that a court post would be a waste of time.
      4. I took away your editor because you were no longer president.
      5. I didn’t conduct a trial, I showed Nick what happened and I said “If he continues, Ima rekt him, k?” He said “Okay” and I asked how Rekt I could make you. Removing you from the election is actually the lowest punishment possible in this situation, you should be glad.

      6. Who else is there to judge? Aj, Nighthawk, and Nick already know what’s going on. You want Banana to judge? Eagle? lol. Eagle’s never on. And what previous involvement? Being told what’s going on suddenly makes him ineligible? What twisted universe are you living in?

      P.S.
      43. OTHER INSIDIOUS STRATEGY TO ACHIEVE PROMOTIONS.
      2. DO NOT FOLLOW CORRUPT WAYS TO ACHIEVE HIGHER RANKS.
      Do I really need to continue with this?

      1. 2. Not a corrupt way to achieve a higher rank.
        31. I wasn’t lying, I was inferring. I wasn’t making a group at all.
        32. Giving a 5 year old a gun is a completely different situation than this. There are different ways of interpeting the post, such as literally or figuratively.
        43. Satire is not an insidious strategy.

      1. Quick question, Nick-Sama, what do you mean by “better evidence” that I was insulted? I don’t see how calling me an idiot can be taken in a non-offensive way, xD

    1. As Pzk said, and also.. we are allied to Silence as far as i know. and i am also in Silence (Silence is my second clan).
      I really don’t see any problems in that. Also I would be wasting time staying in a chat that is dead for over 3-4 hours while i atleast could check on other allied chats.

  2. Im like 97% inactive on-chat, but Im 100% active on-site. Probably because I only pop into chat after school (which is 2:40 PM PST) (Note the time zone), just in case people have questions that need answering or want to tell me something. Otherwise, I pop in at night and after dinner, for longer periods of time, but people are usually asleep then. After all, nothing drastic happens in the chat very often, and even if I had a 70% inactivity rating in-chat (70% of the day im not), I would be doing just as an effective of a job as I am doing now on chat, because the odds are that I would still not be in-chat when something interesting happens.

    1. I shouldn’t have to explain this, but here are the parallels:

      1. Obama is playing golf and is therefore away from his job.
      1. Ismail is away at Silence chat and therefore away from his job(?) at GSA chat.
      2. Obama is a terrible president.
      2. Ismail is a terrible candidate.
      3. The reporter will find out whether or not Obama can be trusted.
      3. I will find out whether or not Ismail can be trusted.

      As you can obviously see, my post was satirical and therefore in no direct disrespect to Ismail. BTW, calling someone thick is not necessarily an insult. A larger brain is considered in popular culture to be a sign of intelligence.

      1. When you call someone thick, you are referring to their skull. But thats besides the point, because thats not the argument. I dont see enough connection between that report about obama and the one about ismail. How does that news article have anything to do with trusting obama? xD People are worried that Obama isn’t working hard, not whether or not they can trust him

        1. Yes, as in you’re calling them incapable of understanding basic things because the idea doesn’t get through their “thick skull”. Basically calling someone stupid.

  3. hey nick your a jerk…… how many people will try me even though i’m not gsa
    Honestly to me this is stupid. PZK has proof of satire…. And then theres the other issiue of why would he make a satire post? Clearly was not thinking. And then on the other end you have jeep trying all he can to get pzk into trouble. I get that he’s wanting a good confession and to know why pzk made this but still… And even though it was a satire post… did you ask mr. ismail if you could make a satire post about him???
    That’s what i’m missing here. Those things should have been addressed by now.

      1. well this is what happens when you do…. so next time get permission from someone like nick just some advice but don’t just make a post because you want to…. i mean its good to make a post but its bad if its satire and people take it serously as they have done so

Write a Comment...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s