On the unrelated servers, inclusion of Direct Messages.

***On the relation of differing servers, The Treatment of Direct Messages and the Treatment of Non-Related Areas, upon Teen Government.***



Privacy is no privilege; it is a boundary the Government must respect



A government, which possesses no limitation upon scope, is not just



To truly understand my end of the debate, I wish to present my contributions to the matter, and to begin with a basic summary on my experience with this topic.

On March 6th, I authored the first Separation of Unrelated Servers act, and on the Eighth of May, I authored the Separation of Unrelated Servers Amendment, both of which being the only governing legislation, of which, currently control and represent the treatment of relation within Teen Government.



These worked, these pieces of legislation worked because of it being reasonable and maintaining itself within proper grasps of Teen Government reach.

These were both written from one primordial free-one overarching threat-the concept of unjust or unfair punishment, the idea of someone in another server, of something entirely unrelated to this government, to be hurt, for them to worry about this Political Simulator whilst in other areas, to worry of every little word being used against them.

That idea, that threat, it, for lack of better words, disgusted me.



The prospect that led to the creation and existence of the Separation of Unrelated Servers being created.

I am more than concerned about the idea that the principles of my legislation are being reinterpreted in such a non-acceptable manner.

Hence, throughout the creation of the “The Constitution final boss™ edition”, I hold concern over one article above all else.

Whilst the idea, whilst the concept, holds ground, it has a fine reason, on paper…

In practice, the threat horrifies me.

Anything in relation to Teen Government? Truly? 

The purpose of a Government is not to govern everything of a citizen's life, its jurisdiction should not extend further than the server, and should not extend to the point of having this much authority over our lives.



The question is not if it should be used as evidence, the question is whether Teen Government should hold any authority over anything occurring outside of Teen Government, to have any say in non-Teen Government events



Consider the ordinary citizen.

Imagine a friend mockingly ridiculing or insulting another friend, do we consider that evidence of rule 1?

With this law, if I reached out to someone in the mentioning of someone's mental health breakdown, should I be sued under the 27th..

With this law, if I vented to a friend, in any hateful manner, as just about every vent is, should I be sued under rule 1?

If I say a joke, with a cruel punchline, in the confidence of trust with a friend, should I be sued under mental peace?

With this law, if I am breaking down and need someone to talk to, are you to use my issues as evidence because of relation to a political simulator?



Is this just in any which way or sort? Are we to see this as fine?

Sure, some may use DMs for coups, Anti Governmental planning, or even for harming of security, yet do we match that threat via the complete arming and destruction of the privacy we hold within DMs? Do we value the risk of malpractice within DMs above our memberships' privacy?

A competent Government holds itself up, a competent Government handles its affairs within proper means, a competent government relies on internal security, not on raiding my information or my privacy because of the threat of malpractice

If a Government cannot detect malpractice without invading privacy, then the issue is not with the citizens' messages, but with the Government's failure.



This utter misinterpretation of my law's intent is something I do not stand for.

Today, it may be used for venting, tomorrow against criticism, the next for even simply speaking of Teen Government, the good intent does not confine the law into a fair situation

Humans naturally speak of others in private, humans naturally speak or gossip in different manners when within the presence of someone they trust, humans naturally become more hateful or speak callously when they believe in the privacy of their situation.

  


Yet, this relies on emotional beliefs upon mental health, what of the facts.

65% of all human conversation concerns social matters, further studies find that nearly everyone engages in some form of gossip, whilst 3 quarters of it is neutral rather than malicious, the results state 34 of 467 individuals never gossip, granting the idea of it being more than a common occurrence.

  
  


Therefore, if social discussion, of any relation to Teen Government, is prosecutable, then prosecution is occurring upon normal human behavior.

  
  


[Psychology behind why people gossip ( Research study ) : ~r/cogsci~](https://www.reddit.com/r/cogsci/comments/13ep5tn/psychology_behind_why_people_gossip_research_study/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)  (from reddit, so take it with a grain of salt)



A 2024 study begins with

“People vent, as when airing grievances about one mutual friend to another”

[Venting makes people prefer—and preferentially support—us over those we vent about - ScienceDirect](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513824000849?utm_source=chatgpt.com) 



Venting has shown undeniable function within social relationships and social situations.



Neither gossip nor venting is rare, or in the minority of action, neither are small ideas, neither are small things, these are major ideas and major facets of human society.

Laws should target misconduct, they should not prevent venting, they should not prevent private conversations, and they should not limit me from even the most basic of in confidence conversations

  
  


A Government's authority has scope, a scope it must follow.

Teen Government governs Teen Government.

Teen Government does not govern Discord.

Teen Government does not govern friendships.

Teen Government does not govern private conversations.

Teen Government does not govern citizens' issues.

Teen Government does not govern every corner or any area, just because a citizen happened to be there.



Once jurisdiction extends past its scope, we will suffer.

Our scope dying is equal to our privacy dying.

  


The danger of this law is not merely the unjust punishments it creates, but the conversations it prevents.. The needed venting, the needed speech, the breakdowns, the information said in the confidence of trust, used to prosecute citizens, used to break citizens down, and used to ruin citizens further…

Don’t let this ruin our Government, don’t let this push their power further upon you, fight for you, fight for your privacy, fight for your freedom!

  
  


{PS: Whilst this is against the existence of prosecution on DMs of any which way or sort, the threat of sexual abuse, any abuse, or generally the violation of crimes within DMs, to a horribe extend, does exist.

In the case of this though, it is beyond Teen Government jurisdiction, report this to Discord, Reddit, or the body you speak with the individual on, relying on this pol sim is a dangerous situation, one we shouldn’t expect nor mandate, especially at the exchange of everyone's privacy.

Yet, either or, if an individual sexually abuses, or does any sort of malpractice towards you, make that clear to everyone, make people aware of the shit person that individual is, and allow the community to survive with the knowledge of such action}

  


**Tl;Dr:**

As the author of all unrelated legislation, as of now, the current prospect being held within the new Constitution is one I fundamentally disagree with.

I base this upon privacy, the risks associated with it (removing venting/gossiping, study proven facets of human speech and expression), and limiting the reach of Teen Governments jurisdiction.

The original purpose of the legislation for unrelated servers was just that, to limit such things, don’t allow DMs to extend it, do not allow this precedent.

  
  






**All relevant sources**

Article 1: DMs and screenshots of DMs can only be administered in court under the following circumstances:

* (a) The DMs are related to or commenting upon events which are taking place or have taken place within TeenGovernment and both participants of the conversation are TeenGovernment Citizens.
* (b) The DMs aim to sexually exploit or disturb mental peace.
* (c) The DM violates any provision in  §12
* (d) The DM is being governed by §10.5 Privacy protection

  


Subsection 5: Privacy protection

Article 1: This subsection applies where privacy is expected, this applies to, though not exclusively:  
(a) DMs  
(b) Private group chats not open to the public  
(c) Private threads

Article 2: The following shan't be allowed:  
(a) Copying text from one of the spaces outlined in article 1 of this section without consent of all members present in or implied within the text.  
(b) Taking a screenshot of one of the spaces outlined in article 1 of this section without consent of all members present in or implied within the screenshot.

Article 3: Exceptions to §10.5.2 are:  
(a) The screenshot, text, or media is clearly and unarguably for the purposes of joking or “memes” such as catching soon to be deleted horny messages, screenshotting odd or “funny” behavior, etc.  
(b) The screenshot, text, or other media contains incriminating evidence or evidence relating to a crime.  
(c) The screenshot, text, or other media simply contains already public imagery such as screenshotting a picture of a meme.  
(d) The screenshot, text, or other media is being captured of the council general GC, council voting GC, or council Discord server for the purposes of transparency.   
(e) All information shown in the screenshot is without a shadow of a doubt already public and would not reveal further information.

Article 4: It shall not be considered a violation of this section of the constitution to take non-consensual screenshots of messages in related servers to enter into trial. 



Used sources.

[Venting makes people prefer—and preferentially support—us over those we vent about - ScienceDirect](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513824000849?utm_source=chatgpt.com) 

[Psychology behind why people gossip ( Research study ) : ~r/cogsci~](https://www.reddit.com/r/cogsci/comments/13ep5tn/psychology_behind_why_people_gossip_research_study/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) 



General references.

[It helps us learn without making the same mistakes-Is Gossip Really That Bad? 5 Surprising Reasons Psychology Says It’s Actually Good for You](https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/relationships/is-gossip-really-that-bad-5-surprising-reasons-psychology-says-its-actually-good-for-you/photostory/128976598.cms?utm_source=chatgpt.com&picid=128976652) 

\-Researchers have found that gossip isn’t just idle chatter. Instead, it is deeply wired into our social brains 

\-”if a friend tells you someone has a history of dishonesty, you adjust accordingly.”



\-”When people know their actions may be discussed, they tend to behave more cooperatively. Studies from UC Berkeley show gossip can reduce selfish behavior.”

\-”Talking through frustrating situations lowers stress hormones like cortisol.”

 Shows benefits of gossip (reasoning on why limiting it may be negative.)

Solidifying the idea of why limiting gossip could be detrimental, alongside unneeded, prosecution does not need to extend towards me gossiping of Teen Government related actions.



[Intrapersonal, interpersonal, and social outcomes of the social sharing of emotion - ScienceDirect](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352250X19301472?utm_source=chatgpt.com#abstracts) 

“Studies reviewed here suggest that it is time to move beyond the narrow vision of social sharing of emotions as a simple process of emotion regulation. The fact that every emotion leads the individual to turn to others and talk about it indicates that emotional experience raises both”

Solidification of the idea that these social situations are normal



  
Just for the sake of clarity, the legislation does seem beneficial, and the intent is more than positive. I personally agree with the idea, I do not with the invasion of privacy it requires to prosecute based on nothing but the loose terms of relation.

3 comments