Virtual Congress Vote. This Amendment to the SOH Constitution is brought to the floor by Congressman Zdl2442 (I) of Iowa. Any user may be blocked from the Virtual Congress by a 3/4 majority vote for extreme rudeness or misconduct.
On this vote the Yeas are 69%, the Nays are 31%. With 3/4 of the Congress having failed to vote in the affirmative, the Amendment is not adopted.
And my proposed modified version?
Sure, send it to me on Skype to user name a-fly-pa
Only in very extreme cases but yes
KEEP IT FREE!
As third in command of the independent party, I strongly advise AGAINST this bill. It is not our place as representatives of the soh community, to decide who has a voice, and who doesn't.
If this amendment is not passed, I would like to propose a modified version.
1. Any user may be blocked if
a. They are extremely rude or have misconduct.
2. In order to be blocked there must be
a. The comment posted on the vote to remove the user
b. They must be removed by a 5/6 majority
c. Voting ends within 48 hours of the vote being posted
3. The user who asked for them to be removed must be stated.
2d. The congress must be told how/why the comment is EXTREMELY rude
I WILL leave this congress if my 1st amendment rights are violated. If you know me on here, I am rarely rude, but I have the right to be. Misconduct? It would need to far less vague before I even considered it.
Nay. The First Amendment is designed to protect speech that you disagree with.
Extreme rudeness? No.
Misconduct? So long as it's a felony, okay.
Maybe a 5/6 majority? And who defines what's rude?
I assume what will happen is a user will complain, then a poll will be put up, then it's up to the people.
And that we would be provide what they say, not just that someone had complained
As Mr. wallace yelled "Freedom!"
In extreme cases I agree, but I feel like this law could be abused.
I agree with my fellow Iowan
There should be a set of penalties, and of course at first just a warning.
But repeated instances of excessive trolling, misconduct, and/or bullying should not be tolerated in the virtual congress.
I believe something along the lines of this bill is needed, but it needs some tweaking. As others have suggested, it should also need to be decided by the court. I would also add that it shouldn't go directly to being banned.
I move to amend this amendment as stated by a few other users to require a Supreme Court ruling in addition to a 3/4 vote in order to ensure that minority views are not suppressed merely because most of us don't agree with the view.
Sure almost. You can't MAKE someone unfollow you on here.
Yes you can. You can email Tony and ask him to remove them
Parliamentary inquiry: does the speaker remove the congressman after the motion to remove them prevails?
I see no need to create such a law. We have to my knowledge not had any issues so far.
Tom that address in your location works right
Correct, it was the only way I could write it.
Did you receive my email?
How would blocking them from the virtual congress be done though? We can't force the blocked person to unfollow A-Fly, could we? Or would we just simply ignore the blocked person?
My concerns as well!
It is possible to ask Tony to remove someone from your follower list. I think he would do it if there was an extreme case.
Yeah, you can email Tony and he'll make it where they can't follow you
Oh really! I still don't like the bill though.
Ok cool, thanks for the answers guys. So maybe A-Fly could talk to tony and if someone is voted out of our congress he could remove them and if he would be willing to do it when necessary?
When it becomes a problem, I am sure we can have a vote on this.
As I said above I don't see a need for such a law now. Let's have a vote if anything ever happens.
I Agree Tom, as do 50% of voters. This won't pass with 3/4 without some kind of tweaks
Freedom of speech?
One question I have is logistics. Is this something that is technically feasible? I ask purely out of ignorance to be clear.
How are they to be blocked?
I would assume by the Speaker.
I'm not sure that's possible
Nay. There is too much room for abuse.
Liberty I would like to collaborate with you on some legislation. Can you give me an email address or Skype or some other measure of communication?
Skype: Liberty SOH or libertysoh
Looking forward to it.
Does this need a 3/4 vote to pass?
I would think so.
LEGISLATION: The Supreme Court will only rule on laws that pass Congress.
@Political, it says in the constitution that the Supreme Court has the power of judicial review on state laws.
....but in the virtual Supreme Court we have ruled on several bills that did not even pass.
Oh virtual Supreme Court! Sorry disregard that. I would agree with that
I don't know if the virtual government intentionally does this, but I want to make sure the proper procedures are followed.
Yeah it's kinda hard to rule on something that hasn't happened yet
How exactly does the virtual Supreme Court work?
I would want another measure put in place alongside the 3/4 vote. Maybe a Supreme Court hearing. Otherwise it could be used to suppress minority views.
I support this.
My thoughts exactly.
That sounds fair. To make sure it is genuinely about rudeness and not merely and unpopular point of view.
I am not fond of suppressing other's voices.
I agree as well. Supreme Court hearing needed. Otherwise, could be a clear freedom of speech violation.