==============================  CFJ 1408  ==============================

    Rulekeepor Michael has committed the Class 2 Crime of Unlawful
    Nondisclosure, as defined by Rule 1064/9.

========================================================================

Caller:                                 RedKnight

Judge:                                  Sir Toby
Judgement:                              TRUE

Appeal:                                 1408a
Decision:                               SUSTAIN

========================================================================

History:

Called by RedKnight:                    05 Aug 2002 05:11:47 GMT
Assigned to Sir Toby:                   09 Aug 2002 20:19:50 GMT
Judged TRUE by Sir Toby:                15 Aug 2002 15:40:01 GMT
Appealed by Murphy:                     24 Aug 2002 23:36:47 GMT
Appealed by root:                       25 Aug 2002 02:04:34 GMT
Appealed by Michael:                    29 Aug 2002 09:51:51 GMT
Appeal 1408a:                           29 Aug 2002 09:51:51 GMT
SUSTAINED on Appeal:                    05 Sep 2002 01:20:21 GMT

========================================================================

Caller's Arguments:

As more than one week has passed since I made the request this CFJ should be
Judged TRUE.

========================================================================

Caller's Evidence:

Rule 1064/9 (Power=1)
Freedom of Information Act

     If a Player is mandated by the Rules to maintain a set of
     records, these records must be available for perusal, unless
     such records are designated by the Rules as private.  A Player
     who maintains such records must provide a copy of these Records
     to any other Player upon request within one week.  If e fails to
     so provide a copy of the requested records within one week, e
     commits Unlawful Nondisclosure, a Class 2 Crime, unless the
     Records are unavailable for reasons beyond eir control and e
     reports this fact, with explanation, within one week.

     For the purpose of this Rule, all records pertaining to Votes
     currently in progress, excluding the text of the Proposals under
     consideration, are designated as private until the end of the
     Voting Period.
--------------------------
(In part)
Rule 1370/12 (Power=1)
How to Get a Degree

(snip)
     The Rulekeepor shall retain a copy of each Thesis approved by
     its Thesis Committee.
(snip)
--------------------------
(my message)

I request under R.1064 (Freedom of Information Act) a copy of all theses
approved for degrees and a copy of the SLC for all groups.

RedKnight

========================================================================

Judge Sir Toby's Arguments:

The court does feel that the caller is quite correct in their arguments.
While some have argued that no response was required since no degrees had
been approved by any Thesis Committees, the court feels that a response
indicating that fact was still required. The court has searched the Public
Forums and has found that Rulekeepor Michael did not respond to
RedKnight's FOIA request.

Upon close inspection of what is required to find that a player has
committed a crime, the court found this bit of Rule 1575 (Standards of
Proof):

      A Judge shall not find that a Player has violated a Rule or
      committed a Crime unless the evidence provided by the Caller
      places its certainty beyond reasonable doubt.  Furthermore, a
      Judge shall not find that a Player committed a Crime if that
      Player reasonably believed that eir action or inaction was not a
      Crime at the time it occurred.

While the court believes the caller has established the certainty of the
Crime beyond a reasonable doubt, the court is not certain if Rulekeepor
Michael believed that eir inaction was a Crime at the time. While a lively
debate on the subject took place in the Agora Discussion mailing list that
clearly identified Rulekeepor Michael as responsible for maintaining
approved Thesis and responding to the FOIA request, Agora Discussion is
not a Public Forum, and therefore Rulekeepor Michael doesn't have any
obligation to monitor it and e can't be expected to be aware of eir
responsibility from the discussion on it. The court notes that Rulekeepor
Michael did eventually participate in the discussion, however eir only
message on the subject was sent after the time limit expired for the FOIA
request. There is a reasonable possibility that Rulekeepor was not aware
of eir responsibility to maintain the aproved Thesis until after the time
limit expired for responding to the FOIA request.

Since several players, including this judge, were surprised at the fact
that the Rulekeepor is responsible for maintaining a record of all Thesis
approved for degrees, it is reasonable to assume that Rulekeepor Michael
was also unaware of the fact until it was too late. The problem is further
compounded by the fact that the FOIA request was not specifically directed
to the Rulekeepor. Since it is reasonable to believe that Rulekeepor
Michael didn't know that e had to maintain a record of all Thesis approved
for degrees, and since the FOIA request was not directed to the
Rulekeepor, it seems reasonable to conclude that Rulekeepor Michael was
unaware that e had to respond to the FOIA request and thus was unaware
that not responding to it was a Crime.

The question now comes down to whether Rulekeepor Michael's ignorance of
Rule 1370 qualifies as a reasonable belief "that eir action or inaction
was not a Crime at the time it occurred." While we may give some leeway to
new Players who are still trying to digest the complete ruleset, the
latest Registrar report indicates that Rulekeepor Michael became a Player
in January 1993. That seems plenty of time to familiarize emself with the
Rules. E has been through several "Read the Ruleset" weeks as well.

In addition, it should be the responsibility of each player to familiarize
emself with the requirements of an Office before they take such an Office.
Admittedly, the Thesis Rule is not within the "Rulekeepor" section of the
Rules, however there are several Rules mentioning the Rulekeepor that are
not in this section either. A quick text search for "Rulekeepor" within
the Rules uncovers the Thesis Rule. This seems like a reasonable
requirement for an Officer.

The court feels that ingorance of the Rules is insufficient for reasonable
belief "that eir action or inaction was not a Crime at the time it
occurred" for this CFJ.

The court issues a judgement of True.

The court executes a sentencing order to the Herald to assess Rulekeepor
Michael a 2 Blot penalty, as specified by Rule 1505, and as required by
Rule 1504.

The court executes an order to compel to the Rulekeepor to provide a copy
of all Theses approved by all Thesis Committees.

========================================================================

Judge Sir Toby's Evidence:

Rule 1575/5 (Power=1)
Standards of Proof

      Unless otherwise specified, all Judgements shall be consistent
      with the preponderance of the evidence.

      A Judge shall not find that a Player has failed to perform a
      duty unless the preponderance of evidence provided by the Caller
      supports the claim.

      A Judge shall not find that a Player has violated a Rule or
      committed a Crime unless the evidence provided by the Caller
      places its certainty beyond reasonable doubt.  Furthermore, a
      Judge shall not find that a Player committed a Crime if that
      Player reasonably believed that eir action or inaction was not a
      Crime at the time it occurred.


Registrar's Census Report (in part)
Date of this Report:  Tue  6 Aug 2002
Date of last Report:  Sun 28 Jul 2002
(All times are in UTC)

                                 Changed    Changed    Changed
Nickname      Flags  Registered  Activity   Noisiness  Role
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Craig         FNs    25 Apr 02   21 Jul 02  25 Apr 02  26 Apr 02
Goddess Eris  ANs     3 Apr 00   22 Feb 01   4 Apr 01  12 Jun 02
Goethe        HNa     4 Feb 01    9 Jul 02  10 Mar 01  19 Jun 02
harvel        HNa    20 Apr 99    4 Aug 02   5 Jan 01  14 May 02
Michael       ANp    29 Jun 93   23 Feb 01  21 Apr 02   6 Feb 01
Murphy        ANa   ~ 1 Feb 96   22 Feb 01  23 Aug 96   8 Jul 02
neil          FNa    24 Jun 01   29 Jul 02  29 Jul 02   3 Oct 01
Oerjan        FNs   ~   Apr 96   21 Apr 02  20 Apr 01  28 Jul 01
OscarMeyr     ANp     4 Mar 02    4 Mar 02   4 Mar 02   5 Mar 02
RedKnight     ANsGU  21 Jul 02   21 Jul 02  21 Jul 02  21 Jul 02
root          ANp    13 May 01   13 May 01  13 May 01  31 May 02
Sir Toby      ANp     3 Feb 02    3 Feb 02   3 Feb 02  22 Jul 02
Steve         ANa     1 Jul 94   23 Feb 01  23 Jun 00   7 Sep 01
Syllepsis     ANs     5 Feb 01   22 Feb 01  29 May 02   3 Dec 01
t             ANs    14 Oct 99   22 Feb 01  14 Oct 99  15 Jan 01

========================================================================

Appellant Murphy's Arguments:

Rulekeepor Michael is /not/ required to keep copies of all theses approved for
degrees, which is what RedKnight requested.  E is only required to keep copies
of theses approved by a Thesis Committee.

Failing to respond to a FOIA request for X is only a Crime if you are required
to maintain X.  (Rule 1064)  Michael is not required to maintain X.

========================================================================