The Court of Apolytonia is in Session: Case 5

[notyoueither]

DO NOT POST REPLIES!
before reading this opening post


Rules of the Court

1. No one will post any message within this thread until invited explicitly by the Senior Justice, or as allowed by these rules.
2. The case will begin with the Complainant or their representative being invited to post. He or she may then take as many posts as are required to present their case. The Complainant would be advised not to go on indefinitely and to be respectful of the court's time.
3. The Complainant will expilicitly state when they are finished.
4. The Senior Justice will then invite the Respondent or their representative to post.
5. The Respondent may begin by asking the court to dismiss the case. If such motion is made, the Senior Justice will communicate with the other justices. Once 3 justices have agreed, the Senior Justice (or another appointed by him or her) will post that decision. Assuming the case continues...
6. The Respondent will be invited to post their defence. The Respondent will follow the same guidelines as the Complainant.
7. The Respondent will explicitly state when they are finished.
8. At the conclusion of the Respondents case the Complainant will be invited to rebut their arguments. The Complainant will state when they are finished.
9. The Respondent will always be given the last word, so after the Complainant is finished rebuttal, the Respondent will be invited to reply to what the Complainant has said in rebuttal. The Respondent will state when they are finished.

10. The cases are finished.
11. Justices may now freely ask questions of the Complainant and the Respondent. Members of the public may request to be heard. Any such hearing granted to the public must be invited by the Senior Justice or by a direct question addressed to them by any justice.
12. Any member of the public may request being heard by PM to the Senior Justice, or by a simple statement of 'May I be heard?' within the thread. Do not be surprised if the Senior Justice requires you to PM him with your concern before allowing you to post in the thread.

* No one will post in the thread prior to being invited by the Senior Justice or as explicitly allowed within these rules. In other words, other justices and those directly addressed by them may respond without invitation at appropriate times.
* The Senior Justice may interrupt at any time to make a point of order. All persons with no exceptions will respect his or her orders.
* The Complainant and the Respondent may ask permission to make motions during any point of the proceedings after the Senior Justice establishes the thread. Such motions will be preceded by the moving party posting 'Motion'. At that point others will stop posting. The Senior Justice will recognize the party and the motion will be made. The Senior Justice will rule and will invite any parties interrupted to resume.
* The Senior Justice may appoint any other justice to stand in his or her stead if an absence requires it. That justice will be the Senior Justice from that point until the original Senior Justice returns.
* The Senior Justice is the law and the only law within this thread and under the gOdz. He or she may make any relevant decision at any time in accord with our established rules and laws. All people without exception will respect his or her decisions and the order of this court.

This court will be in session until declared closed by the Senior Justice.

[notyoueither]

The Case

Complainant: Mr. Orange
Respondent: Reddawg
Other Persons of Standing: jdjdjd representing the Respondent
Status: Being Heard
Senior Justice: notyoueither assisted by Sheik
Justices Attending: kring, Kramerman, Nimitz, notyoueither, Sheik

---

The Issue:

Mr. Orange complains

I, Mr. Orange hereby submit a formal complaint against Reddawg on October 21st, 2002 to the Court of Apolytonia.

I am seeking redress for libel and slander on 15-10-2002 18:36 in the thread Apolytonia Defense Review (580 – Vol. I) under Amendment IV: Bill of Rights; Clause 3, Clause 6 and Clause 7 of the Code of Laws or Article IV. Citizens; 5), 8) and 9) of the New Constitution, depending ratification by the citizens of Apolytonia.

It is in my belief that within the context of the textual messages contained within said thread, that I, Mr. Orange endured vicious attacks upon my character by a sitting Minister within our government Reddawg that are irreversible within the Apolyton C3DG community at large.

Without submitting any facts that either the MilCalc or my compiled statistics violated the “rules of the game”, Reddawg made the accusation I cheated to obtain the statistical information I supplied within the thread. However, in said thread, prior information (Exhibit A) and the MilCalc itself, I stated the statistics were estimates, based on speculative numbers created through hard data from the game with the MilCalc (Exhibit B). As a sitting member of the government, Reddawg violated Clause 7 or 9) and gave false information to the citizens of Apolytonia about my character and my statistical production. From this accusation, Reddawg also violated Clause 6 or 8) in the form of verbal condemnation suggesting I should discontinue my publication without any due process from the law, which subsequently violated Clause 3 or 5) and my right to free speech.

I submit as evidence, the following items:

Exhibit A: War Acadamy:Civ Military Calculator
Exhibit B: MilCalc
[/q]

The response from Reddawg (represented by jdjdjd)

I am deeply disturbed by the case being brought against me by Mr. Orange. It had been my understanding at the time of the incident that all things were cleared up, and that there was a mutual feeling that the situation was over with. I feel that I committed no other crime than expressing my opinion and pursuing what I felt was necessary to uphold the rules of the game. I will defend my honor in the court to the utmost.

---

It had been mentioned to me that the pertinent information for this case is not readily available. While there are links in the quoted material, they are hidden by the colour scheme. Therefore, I am repeating them here.

The thread:
Apolytonia Defense Review (580 – Vol. I)

Other links:
War Acadamy:Civ Military Calculator
MilCalc

[notyoueither]

The Hearing

This case involves two issues and as such the hearing will be conducted in two parts.

Firstly, did Mr. Orange cheat by playing ahead or in some other way gaining information from a save that was not available to the rest of the citizens of the game?

Secondly, did Reddawg do any wrong in his responses in Mr. Orange's thread?

We will begin by hearing arguments regarding the first issue. Mr. Orange will begin. When he says he is finished, jdjdjd will respond. jdjdjd need not wait for me to invite him provided that Mr. Orange states he is finished.

Once jdjdjd has compleated his opening response I will decide on where to proceed from there. Please wait for my decision.

You may begin Mr. Orange.

[Mr. Orange]

Thank you, your Honor.

As an elected member of government, Reddawg, unless he explicitly states it within his post, is acting as an elected official every time he participates within a thread, no more acutely presented then with his signature: “Minister of the Economy: Term IV, V / Ministre d'Économie: Session IV, V”.

Being an elected official, the weight of his posts not only reflect the stature of his position but also, as said member, becomes an opinion of the government. Since the MilCalc was available, but Reddawg’s chose not to review it, and still made allegations without specific reference, he knowingly made allegations to the validity of the MilCalc without any basis in fact.

And by posting his statements to the community at large, Reddawg presented false information to the public. As an elected official, representing the government, he violated Article IV: Clause 9. A premeditative failure to review disclosed material does not give precipice to convey inaccurate statements to the community at large.

No elected official has the power to “bend” the rules. An official is bound by the rules to be accurate when posting. If they are not informed about a topic, they need to become so before posting any comments that would be considered disinformation under said law, unless they specifically state they are posting as a citizen and not as an elected official, which Reddawg made no attempt to do.

Reddawg never made any hard correlation to any of the available formulas or references that he saw as potential hazards. The vanity he displayed showed no deference to his admitted false accusations or to his inability to understand the methods to creating statistical estimates. All he was willing to concede was that he felt indignant to his damaging accusations.

Unfortunately, actions have repercussions and Reddawg’s malicious proceedings placed a relative new member to the community inside a public inquisition . By incorrectly associating me with breaking game rules and soiling my contribution through his abuse of language, he preemptively damaged any reputation my contribution might have received.

And by damaging said reputation, Reddawg took away the confidence to further contribute statistical information to the community. What would be the purpose of making said contribution if it would be held suspect without any factual evidence? It would be a constant struggle to reaffirm there was nothing wrong with said work to begin with, a situation that would never occurred if this character assault had never occurred.

If a proven confirmation of negligence determined the statistical information presented was “cheating”, then condemnation would have been warranted. However, in his position of influence, his public condemnation of my contribution was a form punishment, violating Article: IV Clause 8 which concurrently lead to a violation of Article: IV Clause 3 which infringed upon my right to free speech, specifically in the manner of posting said statistical information via the MilCalc.

I have completed my statement.

[notyoueither]

Mr. Orange, to be clear regarding the first issue we are considering...

You maintain that you did not cheat in any way?

You did not click the end turn button?

You did not perform any unreversible action with the save that could be seen as equivalent to playing ahead, such as establishing an embassy, or other such action?

jdjdjd, please wait.

[Mr. Orange]

Yes. I maintain that I did not cheat in any way.

No. I did not click the end turn button.

No. I did not make any unreversible action with the save that could be seen as equivalent to playing ahead, such as establishing an embassy, or other such action.

[notyoueither]

Thank you Mr. Orange.

You may proceed jdjdjd.

/Edit. Please remain specific to the first issue.

[Mr. Orange]

Motion.

[notyoueither]

Go ahead.

[Mr. Orange]

You Honor.
Thank you, your Honor

For the record, would Mr. jdjdjd acknowledge his presence to the court within an applicable period of time?

Also, concerding the proceeding of this case and toward the interst of the court concerning time, may we move to recess of this case and conveine again at this time tomorrow?

[jdjdjd]

Distinguished Members of The Court:

I thank you for allowing my client to defend himself in this lawsuit, and apologize for any delays I may have caused due to RL.

I have read the initial statement of Mr. Orange and quite frankly as a citizen of this nation, was set aback, however, my job here is to defend my client and discuss merely the first issue as listed by Justice notyoueither: Did Mr. Orange cheat. (I do reserve the right at a later time to rebut everyone of the allegations Mr. Orange did make in his opening.)

***********************************************
Issue One:

We agree with Mr. Orange, he did not cheat. The count should be dismissed as there is no dispute and nothing for the Court to decide.

Initially, Reddawg did not have all the details of how Mr. Orange came up with his figures. Mr. Orange did state the following in his initial post in the thread in question:

"Without going into too much detail, using information accessible from Demographics, Military Advisor and the Main Map a set of formulas were devised to gauge a Civ's relative military strength. Obviously, once calculated, they were compared to make this assesment."

It was not clear as to exactly what Mr. Orange meant by "accessible". Reddawg, as a fellow statistician, merely pointed out that hacking into data in some way or obtaining information not normally available during the game, would be improper and against the spirit of the game (which it would have been, however, Mr. Orange did not do that).

Mr. Orange did clarify his calculations in greater detail after that.

While they may still disagree on the validity and reliability of the statistics provided by Mr. Orange, Reddawg does not believe Mr. Orange cheated. Since there is no dispute, this count should be dismissed.

I would like to further state: The Court was not set up so every Mr. Orange could have his ego mended, it was set up to preserve the integrity of the game and this democracy. I am sorry two avid statisticians such as Mr. Orange and Reddawg disagree on the MiCalc, but unfortunately two intelligent men as they, have disagreed since the dawn of time and will continue to disagree till the day the sun burns out. That is why we thirst for freedom of speech, so that we can excel and create beyond what was ever thought before.

Freedom of Speech is a damned thing. Its great when you have it, but a horror when your enemy has it. But, regardless of opinion, the Bill of Rights preserves that right, and as Mr. Orange fights for his, so does Reddawg. A Minister is still a citizen, and is allowed all rights of a citizen.

****************************

Again, we ask that the first issue be dismissed as there is no dispute.

(Edited for grammar/spellin)

[notyoueither]

/Edit. No message since jdjdjd has posted.

[notyoueither]

Thank you jdjdjd.

Could the both of you please PM me with the times you are available tomorrow (the 6th).

The court is in recess. Please do not post.

[jdjdjd]

At this time I would like to move for dismissal, as follow up to my pre-hearing motion, there is no grounds for this complaint. We ask the Court pleas rule prior to proceeding:

1. Mr. Orange did decide voluntarily to quit his citizenship to the demo game. In Amendment III - The Apolytonian Court, it states in 3e. the following:

The Court cannot act on any issue until a non-judicial citizen of the nation brings forth an Issue to The Court.

Mr. Orange is not a citizen of the nation, and should not be allowed to bring forth this case to the Court.

2. This case should be dismissed for the following reasons:

Count One: We do not dispute Mr. Orange's contention that he did not cheat. Therefore, this count is not at issue, and there is no need for court intervention.

Count Two: Slander or Libel are not listed in the Code of Laws and therefore the Court has no jurisdication over such cases. Additionally, since the Court can not dole out punishment or compensation, there is no justification to hear this case. Furthermore, Reddawg is entitled to free speech under the Bill Of Rights, section 3, and clearly his speech falls under this right.

Count Three: Reddawg did not persistently allege that Mr. Orange did cheat. He did question whether or not the statistics were valid. He has that right.

The questions and concerns raised by Reddawg in no way falsely provided information to the people. The Bill of Rights, section 7, states:

[QUOTE]
The government may not knowingly hide information or give false information to the people.[\QUOTE]

In this case, Reddawg was not acting in his capacity as the Minister of the Ecconomy, and therefore not a representative of the Government. The discussion in this thread lay outside the scope of control excercised by the Minister of the Economy. He was merely providing his opinion as a fellow avid statistics cruncher.

Finally, in no way did Reddawg prevent Mr. Orange from continuing to excercise his right to free speech, as can be seen in the thread. Despite what Reddawg posted, Mr. Orange continued to excercise his right to free speech and make further posts in the thread.

Based on the above, we ask that the Court dismiss this case and/or find in favor of the Respondent.

Thank you.

[jdjdjd]

Sorry, nye...
I was typing when you posted.
I am now done.