• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo
- - - - -

"Bill of Right"


  • Please log in to reply
302 replies to this topic

#1 thefirstimmortal

  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 08 November 2003 - 05:49 AM


WASHINGTON, DC-Flanked by key members of Congress and his administration, President Bush approved Monday a streamlined version of the Bill of Rights that pares its 10 original amendments down to a "tight, no-nonsense" six.
    
As supporters look on, Bush signed the Bill Of Rights Reduction And Consolidation Act.

A Republican initiative that went unopposed by congressional Democrats, the revised Bill of Rights provides citizens with a "more manageable" set of privacy and due-process rights by eliminating four amendments and condensing and/or restructuring five others. The Second Amendment, which protects the right to keep and bear arms, was the only article left unchanged.

Calling the historic reduction "a victory for America," Bush promised that the new document would do away with "bureaucratic impediments to the flourishing of democracy at home and abroad."

"It is high time we reaffirmed our commitment to this enduring symbol of American ideals," Bush said. "By making the Bill of Rights a tool for progress instead of a hindrance to freedom, we honor the true spirit of our nation's forefathers."

The Fourth Amendment, which long protected citizens' homes against unreasonable search and seizure, was among the eliminated amendments. Also stricken was the Ninth Amendment, which stated that the enumeration of certain Constitutional rights does not result in the abrogation of rights not mentioned.

"Quite honestly, I could never get my head around what the Ninth Amendment meant anyway," said Defense Secretary Rumsfield, one of the leading advocates of the revised Bill of Rights. "So goodbye to that one."

Amendments V through VII, which guaranteed the right to legal counsel in criminal cases, and guarded against double jeopardy, testifying against oneself, biased juries, and drawn-out trials, have been condensed into Super-Amendment V: The One About Trials.

Attorney General John Ashcroft hailed the slimmed-down Bill of Rights as "a positive step."

"Go up to the average citizen and ask them what's in the Bill of Rights," Ashcroft said. "Chances are, they'll have only a vague notion. They just know it's a set of rules put in place to protect their individual freedoms from government intrusion, and they assume that's a good thing."

Ashcroft responded sharply to critics who charge that the Bill of Rights no longer safeguards certain basic, inalienable rights.

"We're not taking away personal rights; we're increasing personal security," Ashcroft said. "By allowing for greater government control over the particulars of individual liberties, the Bill of Rights will now offer expanded personal freedoms whenever they are deemed appropriate and unobtrusive to the activities necessary to effective operation of the federal government."

Ashcroft added that, thanks to several key additions, the Bill of Rights now offers protections that were previously lacking, including the right to be protected by soldiers quartered in one's home (Amendment III), the guarantee that activities not specifically delegated to the states and people will be carried out by the federal government (Amendment VI), and freedom of Judeo-Christianity and non-combative speech (Amendment I).

According to U.S. Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID), the original Bill of Rights, though well-intentioned, was "seriously outdated."

"The United States is a different place than it was back in 1791," Craig said. "As visionary as they were, the framers of the Constitution never could have foreseen, for example, that our government would one day need to jail someone indefinitely without judicial review. There was no such thing as suspicious Middle Eastern immigrants back then."

Ashcroft noted that recent FBI efforts to conduct investigations into "unusual activities" were severely hampered by the old Fourth Amendment.

"The Bill of Rights was written more than 200 years ago, long before anyone could even fathom the existence of wiretapping technology or surveillance cameras," Ashcroft said. "Yet through a bizarre fluke, it was still somehow worded in such a way as to restrict use of these devices. Clearly, it had to go before it could do more serious damage in the future."

The president agreed.

"Any machine, no matter how well-built, periodically needs a tune-up to keep it in good working order," Bush said. "Now that we have the bugs worked out of the ol' Constitution, she'll be purring like a kitten when Congress reconvenes in January-just in time to work on a new round of counterterrorism legislation."

"Ten was just too much of a handful," Bush added. "Six civil liberties are more than enough."



Posted under threat of censorship.

(3) Full Members can lose membership status if at any time in violation of the user agreement (Bylaw A), ... or if engaging in active contravention of the ImmInst principles.

Bylaw A
ImmInst members must adhere to the following agreement or risk losing membership privileges.

Any user who finds material posted by another user as being offensive or objectionable will be encouraged to contact an ImmInst leader. ImmInst leaders are authorized by you to remove or modify material submitted by you to these forums for any reason that we think constitutes a violation of our policies, whether stated, implied or not.

Language Guidelines: Any foul or hostile language used in the forums will not be tolerated. This includes any derogatory statements or profanity. Direct or indirect personal attacks are prohibited.

ImmInst leaders reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or post.

ImmInst will, however, consider removing inappropriate links and material as we become aware of them.

Disciplinary Action: A warning will be sent via email to anyone breaking this forum user agreement. Usually, if three violations occur, the offending member can be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum. Severe violations require only one incident for the member to be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum.

Lifetime Membership as long as no exceptional circumstances necessitates reconsideration on the part of ImmInst as decided by authoritative directorial vote.

#2 Bruce Klein

  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 08 November 2003 - 06:01 AM

William...

ImmInst is not a Country.. we're a proactive nonprofit :)

Isn't there a difference?

#3 Bruce Klein

  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 08 November 2003 - 06:54 AM

You've now posted the Bylaw excerpt in a few different places.. would you care to explain why?

sponsored ad

  • Advert

#4 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 08 November 2003 - 07:09 AM

You've now posted the Bylaw excerpt in a few different places.. would you care to explain why?


Hi BJ, was off posting elswhere, followed that link here. Sure BJ, it's 2:02 in the morning, so I'm starting to nod off, let me address that here, first thing before any additional Posts tomorrow.

Your Eternal Friend
William O'Rights

#5 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 08 November 2003 - 02:52 PM

William...

ImmInst is not a Country.. we're a proactive nonprofit :)

Isn't there a difference?


In principle with respect to free speech, No.

#6 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 08 November 2003 - 03:08 PM

You've now posted the Bylaw excerpt in a few different places.. would you care to explain why?


I'm not posting bylaws BJ, you see, everytime I post it is done under threat that my post will be removed or edited, and I may even suffer electronic death as the result of one post. That's right, your Constitution has the "Death Penalty" for violation that someone in power can evoke. OK, I know, your saying death penalty, that's a little strong, but think about, here are the words (Severe violations require only one incident for the member to be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum.) Sure, if that happens I'll still be breathing, but I'll be effectively dead. Dead to you as can be.


POSTED UNDER THREAT OF CENSORSHIP.
POSTED UNDER THREAT OF FOREVER BEING BANNED FROM THIS ELETRONIC KINGDOM.

(3) Full Members can lose membership status if at any time in violation of the user agreement (Bylaw A), ... or if engaging in active contravention of the ImmInst principles.

Bylaw A
ImmInst members must adhere to the following agreement or risk losing membership privileges.

Any user who finds material posted by another user as being offensive or objectionable will be encouraged to contact an ImmInst leader. ImmInst leaders are authorized by you to remove or modify material submitted by you to these forums for any reason that we think constitutes a violation of our policies, whether stated, implied or not.

Language Guidelines: Any foul or hostile language used in the forums will not be tolerated. This includes any derogatory statements or profanity. Direct or indirect personal attacks are prohibited.

ImmInst leaders reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or post.

ImmInst will, however, consider removing inappropriate links and material as we become aware of them.

Disciplinary Action: A warning will be sent via email to anyone breaking this forum user agreement. Usually, if three violations occur, the offending member can be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum. Severe violations require only one incident for the member to be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum.

Lifetime Membership as long as no exceptional circumstances necessitates reconsideration on the part of ImmInst as decided by authoritative directorial vote.

#7 Bruce Klein

  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 08 November 2003 - 05:37 PM

I'm not posting bylaws BJ, you see, every time I post it is done under threat that my post will be removed or edited, and I may even suffer electronic death as the result of one post. That's right, your Constitution has the "Death Penalty" for violation that someone in power can evoke.


This is true.

OK, I know, your saying death penalty, that's a little strong, but think about, here are the words (Severe violations require only one incident for the member to be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum.) Sure, if that happens I'll still be breathing, but I'll be effectively dead. Dead to you as can be.


You're right, ImmInst Leadership has this power.

When I ask if there's a difference between ImmInst and a Country.. you say:

In principle with respect to free speech, No.


Care to explain how this can be?

I'm unclear as to why ImmInst, as a nonprofit membership organization, has to hold up to a higher free speech standard. Can you explain why you think ImmInst is different from other nonprofits in this regard?

By the way, I'd be happy to know your ideas for a better wording on this... an amendment may be necessary.

#8 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 09 November 2003 - 02:54 AM

When I ask if there's a difference between ImmInst and a Country.. you say:

QUOTE
In principle with respect to free speech, No.


Care to explain how this can be?



Sure BJ, the subject matter here is free speech rights and expression and these natural rights are understood to inhere in all men simply as men. In particular, these rights not regarded as having been granted or created by any human act or agency or a Government. These rights are not a gift from government, nor a gift from the powers to be at this site. They are natural and unchanging, inherent in the nature of mankind and possessed by people by virtue of their humanity.

The right to think is a Natural Right and the beginning of freedom, and speech is a Natural Right and must be protected from those in power because speech is the beginning of thought.

Of course, Judging by the fact that we have a 16 to 2 vote in favor of your Constitution, obviously I stand nearly alone on this matter.

I get to your other question in a moment.

Live Long and Well
Your Eternal Friend
William C. O'Rights




POSTED UNDER THREAT OF CENSORSHIP.
POSTED UNDER THREAT OF FOREVER BEING BANNED FROM THIS ELETRONIC KINGDOM.

(3) Full Members can lose membership status if at any time in violation of the user agreement (Bylaw A), ... or if engaging in active contravention of the ImmInst principles.

Bylaw A
ImmInst members must adhere to the following agreement or risk losing membership privileges.

Any user who finds material posted by another user as being offensive or objectionable will be encouraged to contact an ImmInst leader. ImmInst leaders are authorized by you to remove or modify material submitted by you to these forums for any reason that we think constitutes a violation of our policies, whether stated, implied or not.

Language Guidelines: Any foul or hostile language used in the forums will not be tolerated. This includes any derogatory statements or profanity. Direct or indirect personal attacks are prohibited.

ImmInst leaders reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or post.

ImmInst will, however, consider removing inappropriate links and material as we become aware of them.

Disciplinary Action: A warning will be sent via email to anyone breaking this forum user agreement. Usually, if three violations occur, the offending member can be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum. Severe violations require only one incident for the member to be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum.

Lifetime Membership as long as no exceptional circumstances necessitates reconsideration on the part of ImmInst as decided by authoritative directorial vote.

#9 David

  • Guest
  • 618 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Perth Australia

Posted 09 November 2003 - 05:00 AM

I tend to agree BJ. Like I said earlier, you really needed to spend more time on this constitution thing, like, say, 200 years or so. You are all still thinking like "shortlifers". There is no hurry, after all....

Sometimes you just have to let go of the reins and see where the horse will take you.... Remove the conductors and see what the musicians come up with. I mean, didn't I read you and Laz write that you were Jeffersonians?

Dave

#10 David

  • Guest
  • 618 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Perth Australia

Posted 09 November 2003 - 05:05 AM

Guys, free speech is EVERYTHING! Especially in a communication medium. Why should we be constrained by someone elses socio political beliefs and constructs?

And If you say its 'cos you own the bat and ball, I'll be out of here faster than a bushrat in a drainpipe in a tropical downpour!

#11 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 09 November 2003 - 05:14 AM

By the way, I'd be happy to know your ideas for a better wording on this... an amendment may be necessary.



I have the perfect Amendment, but before we get to that, the first step is to to cut apart, separate, examine and analyze, in minute detail the current Constitution to learn why it will most likely fail. But I got another post to post, so I'll be back later.

#12 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 09 November 2003 - 06:42 AM

By the way, I'd be happy to know your ideas for a better wording on this... an amendment may be necessary.



Let's look at the problems with the current wording.

We start out with (3) Full Members can lose membership status if at any time in violation of the user agreement (Bylaw A),

So let's now first turn to Bylaw A, ByLaw A states


ImmInst members must adhere to the following agreement or risk losing membership privileges.

Any user who finds material posted by another user as being offensive or objectionable will be encouraged to contact an ImmInst leader. ImmInst leaders are authorized by you to remove or modify material submitted by you to these forums for any reason that we think constitutes a violation of our policies, whether stated, implied or not.


Issue one, what is "offensive" or "objectionable". These words demonstrate the twin infirmities of vagueness and overbreadth. Vague because it fails to provide an ascertainable standard for conduct. It prohibits speech on two alternative yet equally subjective grounds. Neither the member nor user nor ImmInst leader can know what conduct the law prohibits or permits.

This law is simply vague and standardless and it leaves the public uncertain as to the conduct it prohibits and leaves those in power free to decide, without any fixed standards, what is prohibited and what is not in each particular case.

Precision of regulation must be the touchstone in an area so closely touching our most precious freedoms because freedom of speech needs breathing space to survive.

Live Long and Well
William O'Rights


Full of controversy, until I retire my jersey
'Til the fire inside dies and expires at 130

Go left, go left, go left right left





POSTED UNDER THREAT OF CENSORSHIP.
POSTED UNDER THREAT OF FOREVER BEING BANNED FROM THIS ELETRONIC KINGDOM.

(3) Full Members can lose membership status if at any time in violation of the user agreement (Bylaw A), ... or if engaging in active contravention of the ImmInst principles.

Bylaw A
ImmInst members must adhere to the following agreement or risk losing membership privileges.

Any user who finds material posted by another user as being offensive or objectionable will be encouraged to contact an ImmInst leader. ImmInst leaders are authorized by you to remove or modify material submitted by you to these forums for any reason that we think constitutes a violation of our policies, whether stated, implied or not.

Language Guidelines: Any foul or hostile language used in the forums will not be tolerated. This includes any derogatory statements or profanity. Direct or indirect personal attacks are prohibited.

ImmInst leaders reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or post.

ImmInst will, however, consider removing inappropriate links and material as we become aware of them.

Disciplinary Action: A warning will be sent via email to anyone breaking this forum user agreement. Usually, if three violations occur, the offending member can be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum. Severe violations require only one incident for the member to be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum.

Lifetime Membership as long as no exceptional circumstances necessitates reconsideration on the part of ImmInst as decided by authoritative directorial vote.

#13 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 09 November 2003 - 06:52 AM

(3) Full Members can lose membership status if at any time in violation of the user agreement (Bylaw A), ... or if engaging in active contravention of the ImmInst principles.



BJ, I can't the ImmInst principles, I gotta hit the sack, got a trip tomorrow and it's 2 in the morning right now. Could you post the principles or provide a link? I'll see you late tomorrow night.

Thank you BJ,
Live Long and Well
William C. O'Rights




Go left, go left, go left right left
Go left, go left, go left right left




POSTED UNDER THREAT OF CENSORSHIP.
POSTED UNDER THREAT OF FOREVER BEING BANNED FROM THIS ELETRONIC KINGDOM.

(3) Full Members can lose membership status if at any time in violation of the user agreement (Bylaw A), ... or if engaging in active contravention of the ImmInst principles.

Bylaw A
ImmInst members must adhere to the following agreement or risk losing membership privileges.

Any user who finds material posted by another user as being offensive or objectionable will be encouraged to contact an ImmInst leader. ImmInst leaders are authorized by you to remove or modify material submitted by you to these forums for any reason that we think constitutes a violation of our policies, whether stated, implied or not.

Language Guidelines: Any foul or hostile language used in the forums will not be tolerated. This includes any derogatory statements or profanity. Direct or indirect personal attacks are prohibited.

ImmInst leaders reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or post.

ImmInst will, however, consider removing inappropriate links and material as we become aware of them.

Disciplinary Action: A warning will be sent via email to anyone breaking this forum user agreement. Usually, if three violations occur, the offending member can be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum. Severe violations require only one incident for the member to be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum.

Lifetime Membership as long as no exceptional circumstances necessitates reconsideration on the part of ImmInst as decided by authoritative directorial vote.

#14 Bruce Klein

  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 09 November 2003 - 07:05 AM

Could you post the principles or provide a link? I'll see you late tomorrow night.


I'm not sure if I follow.. the Constitution, of course is here..and forum guidelines are here.. but as to 'principles' I'm not sure what you're asking for.

Have a safe trip!
BJK

#15 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 09 November 2003 - 11:44 PM

I'm not sure if I follow.. the Constitution, of course is here..and forum guidelines are here.. but as to 'principles' I'm not sure what you're asking for.

Have a safe trip!
BJK


Let me clarify, under Article III, section 3, subsection (3), it states cancellation may happen " if engaging in active contravention of the ImmInst principles", so my question is, where in writing are those principles??? I could not find them, could you supply me with that link?

Article III. -- Membership


* Section 3 -- Cancellation of Membership

(3) Full Members can lose membership status if at any time in violation of the user agreement (Bylaw A), if their membership status is no longer supported by donation as designated in (Bylaw B) or if engaging in active contravention of the ImmInst principles. Whether this is the case shall only be determined by authoritative directorial vote. The member must be notified in writing.

Thank You BJ,
Live Long and Well
William O'Rights






POSTED UNDER THREAT OF CENSORSHIP.
POSTED UNDER THREAT OF FOREVER BEING BANNED FROM THIS ELETRONIC KINGDOM.

(3) Full Members can lose membership status if at any time in violation of the user agreement (Bylaw A), ... or if engaging in active contravention of the ImmInst principles.

Bylaw A
ImmInst members must adhere to the following agreement or risk losing membership privileges.

Any user who finds material posted by another user as being offensive or objectionable will be encouraged to contact an ImmInst leader. ImmInst leaders are authorized by you to remove or modify material submitted by you to these forums for any reason that we think constitutes a violation of our policies, whether stated, implied or not.

Language Guidelines: Any foul or hostile language used in the forums will not be tolerated. This includes any derogatory statements or profanity. Direct or indirect personal attacks are prohibited.

ImmInst leaders reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or post.

ImmInst will, however, consider removing inappropriate links and material as we become aware of them.

Disciplinary Action: A warning will be sent via email to anyone breaking this forum user agreement. Usually, if three violations occur, the offending member can be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum. Severe violations require only one incident for the member to be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum.

Lifetime Membership as long as no exceptional circumstances necessitates reconsideration on the part of ImmInst as decided by authoritative directorial vote.

#16 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 10 November 2003 - 12:09 AM

ImmInst leaders are authorized by you to remove or modify material submitted by you to these forums for any reason that we think constitutes a violation of our policies, whether stated, implied or not.


"For any reason that we think constitutes a violation of our policies, whether stated, implied or not."?

This current bylaw does not contain a core of easily identifiable and proscribable conduct that it prohibits. Vague laws offend several important values. First, because we assume that man is free to steer between lawful and unlawful conduct, we insist that laws give the person of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited, so that he may act accordingly.

Vague laws may trap the innocent by not providing fair warning. Second, if arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement is to be prevented, laws must provide explicit standards for those who apply them.

A vague law impermissibly delegates basic policy matters to leaders, users and members for resolution on an ad hoc and subjective basis, with the attendant dangers of arbitrary and discriminatory application. Also where a vague statute 'abuts upon sensitive areas of the basic natural human right of free speech, it operates to inhibit the exercise of those freedoms. Uncertain meanings inevitably lead some members to '"steer far wider of the unlawful zone" ...than if the boundaries of the forbidden areas were clearly marked.'"



Live Long and Well
Your Eternal Friend
William C. O'Rights




POSTED UNDER THREAT OF CENSORSHIP.
POSTED UNDER THREAT OF FOREVER BEING BANNED FROM THIS ELETRONIC KINGDOM.

(3) Full Members can lose membership status if at any time in violation of the user agreement (Bylaw A), ... or if engaging in active contravention of the ImmInst principles.

Bylaw A
ImmInst members must adhere to the following agreement or risk losing membership privileges.

Any user who finds material posted by another user as being offensive or objectionable will be encouraged to contact an ImmInst leader. ImmInst leaders are authorized by you to remove or modify material submitted by you to these forums for any reason that we think constitutes a violation of our policies, whether stated, implied or not.

Language Guidelines: Any foul or hostile language used in the forums will not be tolerated. This includes any derogatory statements or profanity. Direct or indirect personal attacks are prohibited.

ImmInst leaders reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or post.

ImmInst will, however, consider removing inappropriate links and material as we become aware of them.

Disciplinary Action: A warning will be sent via email to anyone breaking this forum user agreement. Usually, if three violations occur, the offending member can be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum. Severe violations require only one incident for the member to be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum.

Lifetime Membership as long as no exceptional circumstances necessitates reconsideration on the part of ImmInst as decided by authoritative directorial vote.

#17 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 10 November 2003 - 01:42 AM

Hi BJ,
A few quick questions.

1. On the main page there is a button to Access all Forums, except the full members forum, correct?

2. And anyone on the planet who can access a computer can enter that main forum?

3. And do you recall that it says under the "First Time Here" link, "ImmInst does not excluded anyone from membership." In fact, ImmInst "readily encourages participation from opposing sides".

4. Would it be fair to say that several billion people are wecome to join and post?

5. Would you further agree that ImmInst believes in debating?

6. In fact BJ, under the heading "How does ImmInst foster debate?" don't you have listed "The two main vehicles for debate are the online forums and chat room"?

7. And do you also recall that it says under "What is ImmInst?" That "ImmInst... serves as a platform for its members to exhibit, exchange and debate ideas", would that be a fair characterization.

8. And could you clarify and define what is meant by the statement "ImmInst serves as a virtual community" listed under "What does ImmInst do?"

Thank You
Live Long and Well
William C. O'Rights
The First Immortal







POSTED UNDER THREAT OF CENSORSHIP.
POSTED UNDER THREAT OF FOREVER BEING BANNED FROM THIS ELETRONIC KINGDOM.

(3) Full Members can lose membership status if at any time in violation of the user agreement (Bylaw A), ... or if engaging in active contravention of the ImmInst principles.

Bylaw A
ImmInst members must adhere to the following agreement or risk losing membership privileges.

Any user who finds material posted by another user as being offensive or objectionable will be encouraged to contact an ImmInst leader. ImmInst leaders are authorized by you to remove or modify material submitted by you to these forums for any reason that we think constitutes a violation of our policies, whether stated, implied or not.

Language Guidelines: Any foul or hostile language used in the forums will not be tolerated. This includes any derogatory statements or profanity. Direct or indirect personal attacks are prohibited.

ImmInst leaders reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or post.

ImmInst will, however, consider removing inappropriate links and material as we become aware of them.

Disciplinary Action: A warning will be sent via email to anyone breaking this forum user agreement. Usually, if three violations occur, the offending member can be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum. Severe violations require only one incident for the member to be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum.

Lifetime Membership as long as no exceptional circumstances necessitates reconsideration on the part of ImmInst as decided by authoritative directorial vote.

#18 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 10 November 2003 - 04:03 AM

"In those wretched countries where a man cannot call his tongue his own, he can scarce call anything his own. Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech."

Benjamin Franklin









POSTED UNDER THREAT OF CENSORSHIP.
POSTED UNDER THREAT OF FOREVER BEING BANNED FROM THIS ELETRONIC KINGDOM.

(3) Full Members can lose membership status if at any time in violation of the user agreement (Bylaw A), ... or if engaging in active contravention of the ImmInst principles.

Bylaw A
ImmInst members must adhere to the following agreement or risk losing membership privileges.

Any user who finds material posted by another user as being offensive or objectionable will be encouraged to contact an ImmInst leader. ImmInst leaders are authorized by you to remove or modify material submitted by you to these forums for any reason that we think constitutes a violation of our policies, whether stated, implied or not.

Language Guidelines: Any foul or hostile language used in the forums will not be tolerated. This includes any derogatory statements or profanity. Direct or indirect personal attacks are prohibited.

ImmInst leaders reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or post.

ImmInst will, however, consider removing inappropriate links and material as we become aware of them.

Disciplinary Action: A warning will be sent via email to anyone breaking this forum user agreement. Usually, if three violations occur, the offending member can be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum. Severe violations require only one incident for the member to be permanently blocked from making further posts to the forum.

Lifetime Membership as long as no exceptional circumstances necessitates reconsideration on the part of ImmInst as decided by authoritative directorial vote.

#19 Bruce Klein

  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 10 November 2003 - 04:11 AM

1. On the main page there is a button to Access all Forums, except the full members forum, correct?


Correct, unless of course.. one has become a Full Member.

2. And anyone on the planet who can access a computer can enter that main forum?


Yes.

3. And do you recall that it says under the "First Time Here" link, "ImmInst does not excluded anyone from membership." In fact, ImmInst "readily encourages participation from opposing sides".


I do. I think it's important to encourage all sides in the discussion.

4. Would it be fair to say that several billion people are wecome to join and post?


This would be fair.

5. Would you further agree that ImmInst believes in debating?


I think this is clear.

6. In fact BJ, under the heading "How does ImmInst foster debate?" don't you have listed "The two main vehicles for debate are the online forums and chat room"?


You're very perceptive, yepper.

7. And do you also recall that it says under "What is ImmInst?" That "ImmInst... serves as a platform for its members to exhibit, exchange and debate ideas", would that be a fair characterization

.

This is an accurate characterization from my point of view, Yes.

8. And could you clarify and define what is meant by the statement "ImmInst serves as a virtual community" listed under "What does ImmInst do?"


Humans are social creatures. By creating space where a group of humans can exchange ideas and get to know one another..I think is a good way in which a group can facilitate reaching goals quicker.

Thus, I think "virtual community" in much the same way we have town hall meetings... yet.. by using technology that is readily available to most.. we can make these meetings more accessible.. and more functional.. for example with forums/chat there is an open record.

#20 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 10 November 2003 - 04:21 AM

Hey BJ, I think you missed this one

Let me clarify, under Article III, section 3, subsection (3), it states cancellation may happen " if engaging in active contravention of the ImmInst principles", so my question is, where in writing are those principles??? I could not find them, could you supply me with that link?

Article III. -- Membership


* Section 3 -- Cancellation of Membership

(3) Full Members can lose membership status if at any time in violation of the user agreement (Bylaw A), if their membership status is no longer supported by donation as designated in (Bylaw B) or if engaging in active contravention of the ImmInst principles. Whether this is the case shall only be determined by authoritative directorial vote. The member must be notified in writing.



#21 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 10 November 2003 - 04:30 AM

Humans are social creatures.  By creating space where a group of humans can exchange ideas and get to know one another..I think is a good way in which a group can facilitate reaching goals quicker.

Thus, I think "virtual community" in much the same way we have town hall meetings... yet.. by using technology that is readily available to most.. we can make these meetings more accessible.. and more functional.. for example with forums/chat there is an open record.



So, it's fair to say, is it not, that this site is essentially being held in trust for the use of the public and is being used for purposes of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens of the world, discussing public questions and displaying expressions.

Indeed, the very concept of this site is very much as a "public forum", indeed a "World Public Forum" , would that not be true?

#22 David

  • Guest
  • 618 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Perth Australia

Posted 10 November 2003 - 04:32 AM

I do think the directors have gone into this gung ho. They are probably quite proud of their efforts, however it seems that they really needed a couple of students of politics, sociology and law involved. As you point out, the whole thing is just too vague. Better to not have a constitution at all than a bad one, me thinks.

Especially when you put Imminst into context. Its currently mainly a chat room! One revolving aroung some interesting ideas, but a chat room none the less. There ist ime for a constitution later, when things hot up a little. Like I said, in 200 years or so.

What I never fail to lose sight of, is that my impression of natural rights may be different to someone elses. That's my main reason for not putting them on parchment! Should a post be deleted because it uses the word "masturbation" or "F**ck, or the new f$#ck, C%$nt? I hear these words every day, in my home via the television, on the radio, as I walk past the coffee shop 5 minuts walk from my home at the beach.

Just in case you are wondering why I have a bee in my bonnet, I posted a link to some information about some research done into behavioural strategies towards avoiding prostrate cancer, one of the big killers of males, and it was deleted by some authoritarian character or another. Perhaps it's because my Australian sense of humor wasn't understood and appreciated. I gave the post a heading of "Masturbation, the secret to immortality?". Really, how was that offensive? It projected the point of the post, and it attracted attention! Unfortunately the wrong kind...

If you don't want us to behave a certain way, you need to tell us what that certain way is, as we are coming to visit you from all over the globe, and we don't know your culture all that well. If we were to take our knowledge of your culture from what we are exposed to through our many media outlets, we would think all Americans carry guns, have sex at the drop of a hat, do copious amounts of drugs and believe you have the right to drop bombs on people at the slightest provocation! None of which I choose to believe, by the way!

Loosen up! Let the loose end drag, so to speak. Abolish this silly constitution thing and let the freedom that would imply simply set its OWN BOUNDARIES!" Isn't that what your country was founded on?

Oh yea, and stop avoiding the issue..... you answered all your friends (Thefirstimmortal) questions except the real ones.

On the positive side, you are trying, and I think you are trying really hard. Keep it up.

Dave.

PS. Ralph ralph! [lol]

#23 Bruce Klein

  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 10 November 2003 - 04:34 AM

Ah.. well.. you may have found a kink.. I don't know of any ImmInst 'principles'.... however this should probably read 'Guidelines' and have a link to here: http://www.imminst.o.../guidelines.php

So.. there you have a whole new can of worms to kick around :)

#24 Bruce Klein

  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 10 November 2003 - 04:41 AM

Dave,

Sorry about your post being deleted.. and sorry if I missed a question from you earlier.

Let me try to answer from my point of view... other members will have their own take on things.. but while ImmInst strives to be an open meeting place, I think we do need some boundaries.. and who's to say the boundaries you talk about are not being made by us.. the members.. as we go along.. by way of the constitution.

#25 Bruce Klein

  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 10 November 2003 - 04:45 AM

So, it's fair to say, is it not, that this site is essentially being held in trust for the use of the public and is being used for purposes of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens of the world, discussing public questions and displaying expressions.

Indeed, the very concept of this site is very much as a "public forum", indeed a "World Public Forum" , would that not be true?


Yes.. and No. Yes, we want ImmInst to be as open as possible, to ensure that many ideas can be heard and debated... and No, in that we don't want to be completely open in that we're powerless to those who may have ill intent toward our mission.

I think the main aspect one should remember about ImmInst is that while we are a 'virtual community'.. we're also a community with a specific mission.. and as such.. there are certain tasks that need to be done in order to see this mission through.. the balance between meeting the mission and adhering to openness is key to understanding how ImmInst is different from a Nation State.

ImmInst chooses to find this balance by way of majority vote and discussion.... now if a member convinces a majority that there is a better way of doing things.. that would be good.. as it would likely led to a quicker resolution of our mission goal.

#26 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 10 November 2003 - 04:59 AM

Before I get to the can of worms...
With respect to the following bylaw

Any user who finds material posted by another user as being offensive or objectionable


As set forth above, how can your law prohibit activity on the basis that it is "offensive" or "objectionable". Conduct that "offends" some people does not "offend" others."

The "offensive" or "objectional" standard suffers from vagueness, not in the sense that it requires a person to conform his conduct to an imprecise but comprehensible normative standard, but rather in the sense that no standard of conduct is specified at all. Yet that is precisely what your law is attempting to do, proscribe "speech" on the basis that it "offends" some people or that some find it "objectional".

Don't you agree that the way the law is written, it provides vague and uncertain standards, that are almost totally deviod of any real distinction?

Wouldn't it be fair to say that this all depends on what each one of us thinks is "offensive" or "objectional"?

How can we allow ourselves to be bound by laws that are vague to the extent that they have no real meaning, laws that have no clear written parameters? Clearly, not only can we not adhere to such laws, but, moreover, without being clarified in writing there is nothing to adhere to.

A person reading the law cannot know, prior to action, whether his or her conduct was found "offensive" or "objectionable" to persons on the site.

#27 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 10 November 2003 - 05:12 AM

Ah.. well.. you may have found a kink.. I don't know of any ImmInst 'principles'.... however this should probably read 'Guidelines' and have a link to here:


Here come the worms BJ,

Your Constitution has a defect,


more to follow

#28 Bruce Klein

  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 10 November 2003 - 05:16 AM

I think it's helpful to read the passage in total:

Any user who finds material posted by another user as being offensive or objectionable will be encouraged to contact an ImmInst leader.

This key here is that ImmInst leadership would be making the ultimate decision as to the post. ImmInst leadership that is elected by ImmInst members to reach the ImmInst mission.

Again, ImmInst is not a country.. we're not here to protect all people in their free speech.. ImmInst is here to provide good place for members to reach the mission objective.

#29 Jace Tropic

  • Guest
  • 285 posts
  • 0

Posted 10 November 2003 - 05:23 AM

Bruce probably doesn’t like anyone sticking up for him (sorry, Bruce), but I’m gonna’ anyway.

The first thing to keep in mind is that ImmInst primarily functions as a forum. It helps to think of it as a mall (and no, I don’t spend a lot of time there). The general public—anyone—is allowed to walk into the mall. When people go to the mall, they generally expect their visit to be pleasant without confronting disruptive behavior such as other people screaming obscenities, for example, across the aisle or from one floor to another. This is indecent and something that would likely get the perpetrators kicked out or banned by security.

Security people have policies in which to follow regarding their conduct under certain circumstances. This may be representative of ImmInst’s constitution we’re discussing here. Nobody is forcing anyone to read the constitution when they visit ImmInst in the same way nobody forces anyone to read the mall’s policies. Remember this is a discussion forum. It is a web site someone developed. If I had a web site, for example, where anyone could visit, become “members,” and post messages, you better believe that if I wanted to be the only one in charge, make a constitution, and ban you at whim, I sure in the hell am going to do it.

A mall is private property allowing in the general public. A nonprofit website/organization is private property allowing in the general public. I’m sure if BJ had an office building (I don’t know whether he does) he’d be more than happy to allow anyone inside to discuss immortalist-related topics. But no one would allow someone to stay very long if he or she was being disruptive.

This is not the Wharton School of Business and Public Policy. Lighten the fuck up. I think as tolerant as everyone generally has been the constitution functions well as a formality and to outline directorship conduct in a rather befitting way given its massive intellectual scope.

Jace

Edited by Jace Tropic, 10 November 2003 - 06:35 AM.


#30 David

  • Guest
  • 618 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Perth Australia

Posted 10 November 2003 - 05:25 AM

"I think we do need some boundaries".

Bugger, 'cos I don't. Boundaries either stop people getting in, or prevent them from leaving. Boundaries are a symptom of aversive control. Unfortunately with aversive control, the moment punishment is taken out of the equation you have destructive anarchy. This anarchy is all the pent up resentment resulting from the side effects of aversive control. If you don't have the boundaries in the first place, the inbuilt hostility doesn't get to build up at all, it gets vented naturallly, in small bursts. Better to have small bursts than a huge, destructive explosion.

I believe that people are inherently good. I believe we are all sriving to be the best we can be (Yep, I'm a humanist). We need the freedom to express ourselves in any way we seem fit, short of hurting ourselves or anyone else around us. By imposing a rule of law we fall into the same trap civilisation has been falling into since the beginning of time. Punisment as a means of control. And look around you, it doesn't work! If it worked, we would be living in paradise! I don't know about you, but a world where I can't go where I want, work where I want, see whom I want, love whom I want, eat, drink, smoke listen to, watch and feel what I want isn't paradise. This aversive control stops me from coming to your country and getting a job, so that I can experience all that is America. And I come from a country that follows yours to war every time you call! When I ask to come and get to know you, and work to support myself in the process, your government says no! Are we not friends?

I don't want to amend your constitution, I want it gone. I find it offensive to me personaly. You don't have to tell me how to behave, and I won't tell anybody else how to behave. I will however do my best to lead by example. If people come to imminst and behave improperly, IGNORE THEM! They will either moderate their behaviour, or they will leave. Do you want to impose aversive control on me so that you can control someone else? I think you call that friendly fire?

I know, ignoring people is punishment, but at least it's passive.

If there ever was a flag that I would fly other than the rebel flag of Australia, (The southern cross flown at the Eureka Stockade when the goldminers rebelled against the establishment and the English) it would have Jeffersons face on it.

Gees, I sound like a lunatic, but hey, I'll shout it from the rooftops. Freedom, freedom, freedom!

Phew! I feel better now! Better go get a drink of water and some tissues...

Dave.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users