Aka joining streams with the intent of destroying this stream or such

No

Why do you think so?

It could be very easily exploited I think.

Looking at part of KylieFan's hunk of words:
"Denying the results of an election judged to be free and fair"
Sounds an awful lot like he would use this to stifle anyone who dared raise question about how the stream is being run. I don't know of anyone who was going on about our last election being rigged, but KylieFan obviously doesn't even want it being discussed.

My issue, is that what if he, or someone like him, were to get in power and be able to use this however they want?

I asked about that earlier, and he said it would be confirmed when you do, and if a legitimate challenge comes, community mods could see if there are alts. I actually cant see why that needs to be there, so how would you feel about it if I submitted an amended bill with the suggestions I made earlier, removing censorship from the possible punishments, and got rid of #1?

This post predated the proposed bill, because this was just a suggestion, not a formal bill. When you said no, I thought you meant the concept, not the bill itself. What do you think of the concept?

I'm not sure I really see the need for a concept either. It's not like there's really any insurrectioning people can actually do unless they choose to make their own stream, which has happened and hasn't really caused any problems.

What about the alts joining this stream, which will most likely try to break through the voting system

Yes, you were wanting voter registration correct?

Personally, I wouldn't want to do that, but it's a viable option if enough people think we need it

We'll have to see what everyone thinks though. Good luck getting any real feedback from someone who's not SurlyKong, Silverado, Kylie, Or Wubbz. Hardly anyone seems to participate :/

Yeah

Also, welcome back!

Thank you!

So basically just the dictatorship getting a firmer grasp on the citizens of the stream? Just feeding the dictator? Good work 😜

Lol no. Just not letting people wage war on this stream then hold office

Beez was running as a communist a few cycles ago. After Strangememe was elected there was a communist uprising where they planned to use alts to attack the stream. Now Beez is president. The bill may have good intentions, but it will be overused and mistreated 😎

I don’t want to sound rude, but are you mentally slow? I’m talking about a complete different thing. I’m constantly amazed at how you managed to get yourself out of bed each morning without hurting yourself 😊

The rules are pretty clear cut. Don't attack the stream, and you won't get banned. How will that be abused?

They use it and hold it over the heads of anyone who disagrees with them. This many people considering a civil war defiantly means you aren’t doing your job. If you can turn it around, people will support you and not the civil war. Food for though 😬

I retract my earlier vote. Nay

This would have to be a well-thought and designed bill to preserve legitimate free speech rights of dissenters. Healthy political disagreement is of course an essential part of a democratic roleplay

But, the rhetoric has gotten overheated lately, and it seems there have been actual plans to overthrow the government. I’m not sure how far they have gotten and may never know unless the conspirators fess up.

Civil War is not a legitimate part of a democratic roleplay. It’s a terrible way of trying to model healthy conflict resolution. It is in fact just the opposite.

We have elections regularly, and if you don’t like the result then the options of cooperating with the duly elected government or simply waiting it out till the next election exist.

That’s the dynamic we should be trying to encourage.

You Would agree to eating dog sh*t if beez told you to

Lol

Hmm, perhaps it would depend on the terms. I personally would love to see a bill that gets people who undermine election integrity banned.

Yeah

Don't talk about stuff you're not informed in. It makes you look stupid.

I never said I was smart.

Was put into congress.

The president gets to put 3 congress members in, I was one of them.

We need some definitions to separate "insurrection" (can get you banned) from routine political dissent (allowed). I thought about this a bit: see the numbered bullet points in the proposed ANTI-INSURRECTION BILL:

"The IMGFLIP_CONGRESS finds that insurrectionism poses a threat to democracy. Hence, The IMGFLIP_CONGRESS hereby puts IMGFLIP_PRESIDENTS stream participants on notice that the following insurrectionist conduct could result in punishment up to and including a ban:

"1. Denying the results of an election judged to be free and fair;
"2. Collaborating with repeatedly banned users;
"3. Posting memes and comments calling for Civil War;
"4. Posting memes and comments purporting to initiate wars that lack the explicit support of the duly-elected President and Congress;
"5. Inviting or encouraging outside attacks on the PRESIDENTS stream.

"IMGFLIP_CONGRESS reserves the right to CENSOR insurrectionist content and BAN Memers who participate in the above-listed activities from running in the following election. Punishment shall be proportional to the offense, and shall be determined on a case-by-case basis by a vote of the IMGFLIP_CONGRESS. In the interest of fairness and justice, there will be no ex post facto application: i.e. this bill shall have NO RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION and shall apply only to content posted on or after the date it is passed."

Thoughts?

TL;DR I am against this bill in every way, since it affects people who own streams like the 141. Also this is another step in restricting free speech and liberty. Typical dictatorship methods.

"The IMGFLIP_CONGRESS finds that insurrectionism poses a threat to democracy." Insurrectionism is apart of democracy. when the government fails the people, the people have to step in.
"Denying the results of an election judged to be free and fair" Most of beez' voters came from outside the stream, and those thay YOU, KYLIEFAN, CONTROL. And it was ALL LEGAL. So either we: A: Use registration, to prevent this, or B: We both use this, and i win using your own methods.
"Collaborating with repeatedly banned users" I disavow WN and ill do it again.

"Posting memes and comments calling for Civil War" Once again, thinking how dictators think, and controlling our words. Typical from dictators.
"Posting memes and comments purporting to initiate wars that lack the explicit support of the duly-elected President and Congress" If the president is lacking of doing their duty of serving the people, they must resign, or impeachment shall be brought forward.

"Inviting or encouraging outside attacks on the PRESIDENTS stream" The only thing I agree with here.
One cause is that weather you are pro beez or anti beez, this stream can't be taken over.
"IMGFLIP_CONGRESS reserves the right to CENSOR insurrectionist content and BAN Memers who participate in the above-listed activities from running in the following election" Once again, censorship. You are stripping rights of the people to voice their opinion, and do what needs to be changed. Thinking how dictators think.

On 1, Judged free and fair by who?

On 4, do you mean encouraging it, or actually launching an attack?

Finally, I don't see why we should delete anything they do, since that could be abused by a dictatorial government. I believe it should be a temporary (or permanent in cases of attempting to destroy the stream) ban from holding office, and that's it.

Yes, the censorship would only apply to insurrectionist content itself and the ban would be for the upcoming election (permanent bans only for serious/persistent violations).

1. IMGFLIP_PRESIDENTS Elections are presumed to be free and fair, and the result is certified when the Owner posts a meme announcing the results. If there are credible and specific allegations of fraud, then members may petition a Community Mod to investigate the election. If the Community Mod determines there is no fraud, then the election is re-certified and is no longer open to challenge.

That sounds fair

Way easier than in real life lol

No kidding. lol

4. Hard to say since circumstances vary. On Imgflip as in real life, wars can break out even without a formal declaration of war, due to brinksmanship and failure to follow a command structure. That's what the bill is designed to discourage. There should be no war without careful deliberation and ratification by the duly-elected government.

That doesn't answer my question

Ah, here we go: Here's a thread where Daltoids was encouraging troll attacks on PRESIDENTS even from 4chan

lol

yeah stuff like this

Yep

therealmemer1 is clearly an alt of Daltoids, who is himself an alt of WN -- here was Daltoids being anti-Semitic toward Beez yesterday

imgflip.com/m/TheSecretService here it is still

I'm aware of all of this. Why do you think I suggested a law to ban insurrection?

Remember that Daltoids stream that was basically for nothing but destroying PRESIDENTS? (not sure if it still exists) That's one clear example of insurrection.

That's what I was thinking about when I suggested it

I mean the image we are commenting on

In all of these, these are examples of people trying to wage war. What about the people currently encouraging civil war but not launching attacks? I believe they should be able to do so, even though I disagree with them. What do you think?

I think that the line between encouraging civil war and actually doing civil war can be blurry. Not sure I have a good overall answer without concrete examples.

--The stationing of fighter jets and the testing of Thomas the Thermonuclear Bomb on PRESIDENTS (which we saw recently) seem like veiled threats, but not a Civil War. Same with the memes saying "people are talking of Civil War..." That's not quite Civil War, but it's a step on the road toward it. It warrants a response like what we're doing now, efforts to try to avert Civil War, but not censorship or bans.

--The Daltoids stuff we just looked at: that's definitely crossing the line and would be subject to the proposed law.

Alright. I support that

Could you propose the bill on the stream and see how people vote?

sure thing

Thanks

Hey, did you delete some of Richard's comments on this stream?

I did, because he was being unproductive, insulting, and undermining the authority of a Congressmember.

If he wants to do that on PRESIDENTS stream, that's one thing. But IMO we ought to have higher standards here.

Criticizing a congressman isn't undermining his authority. You know I disagree with most things he says, but let's not delete people's comments

It wasn't legitimate criticism -- he was claiming that RMK lacks the authority to vote. Part of the silly scandal he was trying to gin up yesterday. Scar himself has contradicted that, saying Beez has the authority to appoint up to 3 Congressmembers.

That is false and spreads disinformation about how our government works.

But you can just address his claims to everyone instead of deleting his comments.

Yea, Scar allows the president to appoint three congressmen, but Beez has been AFK for days now and we cannot clarify it. Putting your own cabinet in congress is undermining election integrity. Why would they voted against you? 😐