Author Topic: Enforcement of Technology Act (2015)  (Read 3642 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline CGJ

  • Vice Chancellor
  • Basically New Zealand
  • **
  • Posts: 201
    • View Profile
  • Your Nation: Dartfordia
Enforcement of Technology Act (2015)
« on: September 01, 2017, 11:14:32 PM »
Enforcement of Technology Act (2015)

A Directive to ensure the realistic development and adoption of new technology by empowering the Roleplay Council to enforce restrictions on certain technologies.

The Roleplay Council, acting under the authority of Section 8 of the Founder's declaration on the 26th June 2015, agrees, with the signature of the Founder, as follows:

Modern Technology

(1) The Independent Order, in accordance with the Roleplay Rules, is a Modern Tech (MT) roleplay.

(2) Modern Tech shall be defined as including any technology that:
(i) Is being used or has previously been used in the real world;
(ii) Has been reported by a real life media outlet as being in advanced stages of testing and may feasibly be in use within the next 10 years; or
(iii) Is a realistic future concept or fictional drawing, which is accompanied by a realistic specification, that feasibly could be used within the next 10 years.

Enforcement

(3) Members are required to ensure that all technology used by them or their nation in roleplay is complaint with Section (2), any technology not compliant

(4) For technologies falling under Subsections (2)(ii) and (2)(iii) (herein 'Disputed Technologies'), the Roleplay Council shall have the right, upon due consideration, to deem such technology unrealistic.

(5) [Repealed]

(6) The TA shall be responsible for deciding upon submitted Disputed Technologies in an appropriate and timely manner, and shall serve an indefinite term ending only upon their resignation, removal from the Council or dismissal by the Founder or majority of Councillors.

(7) Disputed Technologies may be reviewed by the TA if:
(i) A member voluntarily requests the TA reviews their technology;
(ii) The TA, or another member of the Roleplay Council, believes such technology may be unrealistic;
(iii) A member reports the technology being used is unrealistic and wishes for it to be reviewed;
(iv) Real-life scientific or technological developments have resulted in a previously banned or restricted technology coming into compliance with Section (2); or
(v) Real-life scientific or technological developments have resulted in a previously allowed technology becoming incompatible with Section (2); and
(vi) The TA has been made aware of such developments in Subsections (iv) and (v).

(8) A member shall have the right to justify why their technology should be allowed, and to respond to any questions or queries by the TA.

(9) Should the TA find a technology to be unrealistic, they may take one or more of the following actions:
(i) Set an OOC ban on the technology being used;
(ii) OOCly restrict the use of such technology in warfare or other competition; or
(iii) Demand elements of the technology be altered to ensure its compliance.

(10) The TA should take reasonable steps to ensure they can make a reasoned and fair judgement based upon scientific or technological fact, including consulting with members who are experts in said field and conducting independent research beyond the Independent Order.

(11) A list of cases shall be made to assist members in their use of such technology.

(12) Should a member fail to comply with the Roleplay Magistrate without submitting an appeal, then the Roleplay Magistrate may issue a Roleplay Order to limit the participation rights of an offending member.

(13) The Deputy Roleplay Magistrate (‘DRM’) shall act in the Roleplay Magistrate’s absence should they declare a formal leave of absence, or if the Roleplay Magistrate’s own technology is disputed. The DRM shall not oversee a case in which their own technology is disputed.

Appeals

(14) A member whose technology has been found to be unrealistic may appeal the decision on the following grounds:
(i) The TA did not take reasonable steps to resolve the matter fairly;
(ii) The decision lacks scientific or technological basis; or
(iii) The decision is inconsistent with previous decisions.

(15) Appeals shall be submitted to the Lord Chief Justice, who may uphold or dismiss the appeal.

(16) Should the Lord Chief Justice uphold the appeal, they shall, by Judicial Order, confer responsibility to the Deputy Roleplay Magistrate or another individual, if appropriate. Should the Lord Chief Justice dismiss the appeal, then it shall be considered rejected.
The Most Honourable Marquess CGJ
Vice Chancellor


Dartfordia: TIOwiki - Politics - Flags - Armed Forces