[tz] Moving more zones to 'backzone'

[Clive D.W. Feather]

Robert Elz said:
>   | It's my point.
> 
> Not much of a point, there are lots of places, including places with
> their own timezones, that I've never heard of, and other than the
> region prefix of the timezone identifier, I have no clue where they are.
> Express any of that in the local languages (whether encoded in latin script
> or not) and there would be lots more.
> 
>   | Kernow is the Cornish name for Cornwall, another part of the UK that has an
>   | independence movement.
> 
> OK, but having an independence movement isn't relevant.   Achieving
> independence (whether recognised as legitimate by other bodies or not)
> would.   Otherwise it would require explicit granting of power to set
> the time, or obviously possessing that power, or actually doing it (and
> that means changing the zone, not just saying "I could do it if I wanted to,
> but it happens I don't").

On Tuesday you wrote:

| if someone has a reason to
| want a zone, which meets the guidelines, then create it.  Why argue?
| The proposer would need to supply the data, and some evidence as to its
| veracity, but if they can do that, what is the problem?

| All that we'd require is evidence that there's someone setting the time
| in some region, which people in the area actually use

And I've been working with that.

>   | But define "authority". My authority starts and ends when people accept
>   | what I say.
> 
> Sure.   But you need to demonstrate that it exists, not just claim it.
> And once again, that can be by demonstrating the legal chain of grants
> of power from some body already accepted to have it (for you, that would
> be the British Parliament, or maybe the Crown in some bizarre circumstance)
> or by demonstrating your influence by actually having your street run their
> clocks at some different time offset than they're supposed to legally.

Why does it need to be different?

Yesterday you wrote:

| The decision would be based generally on whether the authority in question
| has the authority to set the time (which would be demonstrated by their
| having done that, even if that amounts to no more than "The English
| Standard time act of 1317 applies, as amended, including amendments made
| in the future".)

So if I sit down and write that, and one other person says that's what
they're using to set their watch, then I have demonstrated that I'm an
authority. Right?

> If you really create a different timezone, then yes.   I think that is
> already accepted.   But just saying that your street runs on High Street
> Time (HST) rather than UTC/GMT/BST and it happens that HST is the same as
> UTC during winter, and UTC+0100 during summer, and just by coincidence the
> changes happen at just the same time as the EU (and Britain) say they happen
> is not creating a timezone.   That's just grandstanding.

Yes. But it's what you've been saying.

You need to actually define "authority", at which point you're smack bang
back into politics, which is what we need to avoid.

You also need to demonstrate where Eucla gets its "authority" from and why
I don't have the same "authority".

Unless you're basing it *ONLY* on the fact that time in real use is
different. At which point you're agreeing with my position.

> Or I
> guess as a third choice, you could take up arms against Britain, and win
> control of your street (and some surrounds, so there are people involved,
> not just asphalt) set up border control posts, and start issuing your own
> passports, collecting taxes, ... - and remain in that position long enough
> that anyone might take a breath long enough to consider timezone issues.

I don't know what time Sealand, the world's smallest micronation, runs on,
but it meets that description.

> Simply refusing to give someone with the obvious ability to change the time,
> a tzdb entry if they want one will only serve to have them change the time
> in their area for the sole purpose of getting an entry.

But you're going in circles. You're saying that someone demonstrates they
can change the time by changing the time.

> I don't think it is a good idea to encourage
> that kind of idiocy, do you?    The current rules do.

We don't seem to have had that problem so far.

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather          | If you lie to the compiler,
Email: clive at davros.org     | it will get its revenge.
Web: http://www.davros.org  |   - Henry Spencer
Mobile: +44 7973 377646