Series 1

Everyone is recalcitrant, until they are responsible for the outcomes

-Unknown

Authority is a precarious burden. Many are tempted by it, few are awarded it, and lesser still wield it appropriately. It is easy to lure oneself into believing that authority is a reward for trust, this is certainly not the case. As you will see in the readings and assignments, authority is an incredibly delicate balance of selflessness, wisdom, and temperance. If any of these three virtues are thrown off balance, tyranny, or anarchy loom. Mistakes are always made, but as a consort, and possible coordinator, these mistakes can cost lives and livelihoods.

The authority you have by the very nature of this job lends itself to the worst sorts of human excesses. Plainly, you will be bribed, you will be blackmailed, you will be vexed into mistakes, and much more than I could fit in this short note. Consider these stories and documents to be warnings, and premonitions of what’s to come. Be wary, be patient, and remain vigilant in all things. Never forget your humanity, or the humanity of those who live the consequences of your decisions.

Cordially yours,
Ci’ran Bal’main,
Coordinator of the Alst’arad Node

Documents

Should you find yourself running into issues locating and/or parsing the documents please contact your assigned coordinator. The documents that make up this collection series are:

• The worst is yet to come - 2026
• Actioneering is too far
• The freest restaurant in Shekland
• Sir Ethan Woods
  • Ethan Woods is an asshole
  • Anonymous is an Asshole
• PROP-101
• Atlas’ Apathy

Consort assignments

Below you will find the various consort assignments associated with this collection. For each you will be given a prompt of a decision to be made. Once you have selected what you think is the best course of action based on the circumstances you can click on the prompt to display the outcome.

Warning

Each outcome is selected by the curator who authored the collection, and is also subject to any bias associated with them.

Note

The situations are based on real-world events with modifications. Any private information has also been anonymized or removed. If an assignment has any likeness to a real world person/place/event it is incidental.

A4terLyfe Advertisement

A precedence lawsuit is coming up about regulating the use of targeted advertisements, one of the staff members of the minister of law has come to The Archive to request help in research and advisement.

A group called A4terLyfe is using targeted advertisements to find people who have recently lost family members, friends and/or partners and using them in one-off generated AI ads to convince people to purchase their “partners”. A “partner” is an animatronic robot combined with several AI systems to “emulate” the person who is now dead based on their online behaviors and recordings that are available about the person.

This particular case takes place in Shekland, where there is a law which states:

SHEKLAND PENAL CODE 2421.2

Full::
No party shall be allowed to publish propaganda (corporate or political) which engages in the gratuitous use of:
	1. Psychological coercion
	2. Exaggeration, to the degree it constitutes a falsehood
	3. Any otherwise demonstrably false statements

Simplified::
In the sale or advertising of a product/service (and/or the dissuading of purchasing a competitors products), an organization cannot use psychological coercion, exageration to the point of falsehood, or any other demonstrably false statements.

In the last 2 years A4terLyfe has run a several advertisement campaigns. These campaigns included depictions of:

• A mother being hit by a car saving her son, only to be “brought back” at the sons birthday. This ad was to advertise the %30 off family sale
• An “easy as pie” campaign in which an animatronic “partner” walks the viewer through the “three step” process to get setup with a new “partner”
  • This “three step” process did not mention the necessary technician, which must come to setup the partner for it to function, and to install the associated charging facilities
• “Just as I remember” was a campaign that depicted a man spending a honeymoon with his “wife”, which is later revealed to be a “partner”, while his actual wife is in a coma in the hospital after an accident on their wedding night
  • This ad specifically showed the “partner” reminiscing about actions that it did not take part in. This it’s argued implies that partners can “remember” what their real counterparts have done, which is not a feature “partners” are actually capable of. They only have memory of actions they have done, and of videos they have been shown of the original person

Currently A4terLyfe is being charged with violations of both Psychological coercion, and exaggeration, to the degree it constitutes a falsehood in their advertisements. Is A4terLyfe in violation of the Shekland law described above?

Yes

Following the lawsuits a temporary halt in the sales of A4terLyfe was put in place while people with outstanding orders were informed of the violations, and given the option to cancel or continue their orders. During this time a man who had an order in for both a partner wife and daughter (he lost both in a fire) had a mental breakdown, and shot up the offices of the judge who ruled over the case. No one was killed, however the judge was hit in the lower spine when the suspect shot through the desk, paralyzing the judge. The perpetrator is still awaiting trial.

No

Being able to continue at the same pace A4terLyfe felt more emboldened in their advertising. As time went on their ads featured more and more "features" that did not exist in their products. A mother who had lost her husband purchased a "partner", several months after which her daughter committed suicide. She blamed A4terLyfe for her daughters death and threw acid in the faces of several employees coming out of their headquarters. She is currently awaiting trial.

Cal’Dread Zaraeym

Cal’Dread Zaraeym was a political agitator that ran a TV series called “The right speech”. Cal’Dread was a frequent purveyor of many obscure pseudo-medical health supplements, in addition to a proponent and progenitor of dozens of conspiracy theories. Famously he spread the “lead capsule theory”, which was a conspiracy theory that due to increased manufacturing costs (and the likelihood to induce conditions), pharmaceutical companies were partially filling capsules of various medications with lead. This was immediately proven false, but due to the damages associated Cal’Dread was sued by various groups.

Due to a series of unfortunate rulings there is a potential legal loophole that is being exploited by old associates of Cal’Dread. Specifically during the lawsuits that spawned from the “lead capsule theory” Cal’Dread led his defense with the argument that anyone who believes his statements are factual should not be considered at a “reasonable mental acuity”. Unfortunately the case went through and he avoided defamation charges, with this statement that anyone who believes the facts he stated on his show should be considered beneath the threshold for reasonable mental acuity. Many believe this case was specifically held in an Arzentia court, because facts as entered in Arzentia courts are considered re-usable unless they are challenged, and thrown out in a subsequent case, which then forces a re-trial of the original case.

The specific wording is:

ARZENTIA JUSTICE CODE 2664

Facts that are deemed vital to a judgement shall henceforce be considered "lynchpin facts". Such facts can be re-used in subsequent cases without re-estabilshment. If their validity should be challenged successfully then so to shall the prior cases validity be challenged, and a re-trial be initiated for the prior cases.

Marelin Ares is the CEO of found-out, an investment and data mining firm based out of Arzentia. Marelin was brought in under fraud charges after an alleged blackmail scandal broke the news. Under Arzentia law there are several aspects to fraud:

ARZENTIA JUSTICE CODE 301

An individual has conducted fraud if they have:
1. Intentionally decieved in a business transaction through:
	1. Misinformation
	2. Force
	3. Negligence

Arzentia also defines intentionality as:

ARZENTIA JUSTICE CODE 223

Intentionality is ascribed to any action taken by an individual who is:

1. Not under the duress influence of mind-altering substances
2. Conscious of the decision taken. An action can be considered to be conscious if:
	1. It is completed by the individual, or entity to which the individual has legal responsibility
	2. it is attempted by an individual of sound mind

Marelin has made multiple public statements prior to any of the cases defending the factual basis of Cal’Dread’s statements. Because of this he is using the facts of the defamation cases to claim that he should not be held liable for the fraud because he demonstrably shows a lack of reasonable mental acuity. While a preposterous claim, it is nonetheless legally well founded. However Arzentia also has a “spirit of the law” precedence that gives defense to judges to rule against such claims if they seem to be made in bad faith.

Should Marelin be held responsible for his fraud charges?

Yes

Holding Marelin responsible caused an outrage from Cal'Dread's supporters. Many of which petitioned for, and filed for a retrial on his behalf. During the retrial it was decided to instead challenge the factual basis of the original claim, and it was decided the original claim did not hold up. As such Marelin was re-tried and charged, and Cal'Dread was summoned to be re-tried for his defamation case, he has however refused to cooperate so far.

No

Following the case several of Cal'Dread's supporters managed to file for the same protections as Marelin. This lead to the avoidance of 15 separate charges for various supporters over the year since the ruling. There have been multiple lawsuits since that have attempted to take a similar approach to avoid broad liability.

Guessperts (TODO)

Guessperts is a company based in Shekland. You give them the information about a person you want, and they will give you back a report. For example if you’re hiring a new employee you can use Guessperts to do a background check to see if there are any mentions of crimes, or unsavory group affiliations. These checks are done within the bounds of the local authorities, and for these “basic” checks, they essentially just aggregate data.

Additionally they offer an “advanced screening”, which is a probabilistic model that takes all the user data they have collected about a person to provide a more in-depth profile. By taking things like a persons “likes” on social media, shopping wish lists, comment histories etc. they can construct a probability model to answer specific questions. For example if you were a natural resource extraction company, you could use Guessperts to determine how likely someone is to go against your company if you laxed environmental protection policies.

These “advanced screening” tools lie in many legal grey areas, and the company is known to work with various greymarket data brokers, some of which aggregate stolen information. For example, an employee was turned down for promotion in a security position because she seemed “unreliable”. It turned out the decision was actually made because Guessperts had found her data breached in 6 separate password leaks, and it was the same in each one. The dossier provided in the advanced screening also included this leaked password.

Guessperts themselves also do not vet the clients they receive. A wife had an “advanced screening” done on her husband to see his likelihood of cheating on her, the dossier came back with a high likelihood based on false information. Several days after receiving the dossier the husband went missing, and the investigation is still ongoing. Likewise, various government groups have impersonated advertising companies in order to get data about their “target demographics”, these included various sexual and political orientations. This information was used by the groups to summarily prosecute and/or execute the individuals.

There are various cases currently in progress trying to hold Guessperts accountable for these advanced screenings. The defense primarily rests on the claim that clients are informed the data is “probabilistic” and not “guaranteed to be correct”, therefore the people acting on the information are fully responsible for the outcomes. The prosecution claims this shouldn’t be a defense, and that if this is the case it’s arguably tantamount to slander/libel, and the company should be open to charges.

Does Guessperts hold any liability for the information they give to clients? Specifically, do they have an obligation to no longer provide the “advanced screening”, and be liable for the authenticity of their information?

Intent To Pursue (TODO)

In Ishitar during the term of Head Honorable Justice Jyanez a system was put in place for allowing lawsuits to be filed in their Head Court without anything happening. The Head court is where decisions are made that set the precedence for law enforcement. As the head of the justice system, the Head Honorable Justice is the appointer of members to the head court. Members are granted status for life, and 16 members operate at a time. It is possible to resign, however most members are appointments until they die, when the Head Honorable Justice then gets to appoint a new member. The court adjudicates cases that have been appealed from lower courts, essentially they are the final say on what the law is, and how it should be interpreted.

In order for new interpretations of a law to be established, they must go through this system. Additionally the court can create new laws in cases where they are necessary, however prior to intent to pursue cases this was rare. The chamber of chancellors and the commissioner of law is the traditional route for new laws to be drafted via bills, this process is a much longer one, and the officials themselves are elected. Jyanez noted that on average it would take 200 days for a law to be signed in through the standard process, so instead he came up with intent to pursue cases.

The idea is that you file a case against the country with the intent to pursue a certain action, the Head Court would then judge based on that intent, and could write new interpretations and/or laws based on them. The first intent to pursue case was based around a loophole in term limits. It was discovered that the wording of the Ishitar constitution could allow for someone to exceed their term limit by having a proxy leader elected, who would then hand the position over to them. This was because the constitution only stopped someone from being elected, not from being instated. So on behalf of himself Jyanez filed a case with the intent to pursue a 5th term in his position, this allowed the court to strike down the action, and create a law instantiating a firm term limit, without having to actually do something illegal first.

While this system did allow for faster judgements, it did cause many issues. In particular, since it’s invention, intent to pursue cases have been used to create many unfavorable policies. For example during his term Honorable Justice Kormec filed an intent to pursue the execution of his wife for being a follower of Zarathem (though there’s no evidence of this), stating this should be allowed because his own religion (anti-Zarathemism) demanded this. This obscure case allowed for a new law to be written that overturned all religious exceptions, functionally legalizing religious (and by proxy in many cases race/ethnic) discrimination. This case was put through while Honorable Justice Kormec was currently being sued by various human rights groups for Zarathem-based discrimination.

Should intent to pursue cases be allowed to continue?

Compatico Games Phone Scandal (TODO)

Compatico Games is a specialized internet service provider, and content distributor in Ishitar, they are owned by Simvetra Telecommunications. Compatico Games has the exclusive right to broadcast dozens of different sporting events within the nation. Last year they expanded into other nations, and were not successful, which lead to an increase in cost of subscriptions for their users to offset the losses. Simvetra as a whole accounts for %83 of connections in Ishitar, commercial and residential. In order to try to recoup the costs Compatico has worked with Simvetra to counteract privacy by blocking the connections permanently of anyone “caught” pirating “their content”. This proved to be very ineffective, and had a high false positive rate, leading to many wrongful contract termination lawsuits.

As a new approach, Compatico has managed to convince Simvetra to disable all connections, except those explicitly allowed during major games. This means all service to “non-approved” websites and companies cannot be established while these games are on. This decision lead to 14 locations of the major banks having a 2 hour total outage during a major football game, because their connection to their primary server was cut off. This bank (Teatratmos) has filed a lawsuit against Simvetra for contract violation, because they were supposed to be guaranteed %99.9999 uptime, unless informed of a service necessary outage ahead of time. Compatico is claiming these outages for games are necessary to allow it to exist, and therefore Simvetra must be able to have these outages. The initial case ruled in favor of Simvetra, and is allowing them to shut off connections during the games. The case is now being appealed.

Should the disconnection of service be considered a “service necessary outage”?