Public Investigation #6: Chat Poll Ignored (guilty/unguilty)

[Shaitan]

Okay, just so everybody knows the kind of problems I see in this poll, here's an example. The poll question is "Did donsig ignore the results of a spot-poll?" The second sentence of the first post (where instructions and poll particulars are supposed to be) is "On the turn chat of June 12th, donsig as designated player called a spot-poll and then ignored the results."

What would happen if a judge instructed the jury "This man killed his butler. I want you to go vote on whether or not he is guilty of killing his butler."

It's just not right!

 

[Shaitan]

Originally posted by Rain
I think he simply is referring to the practice of ignoring/overturning results that don't lead to the desired outcome which was alleged in the chat and he is alleging it in context of this poll being halted, if that were to occur.

Ouch. I hope not. That's most definitely not my intent.

 

[Cyc]

Actually, Shaitan, Rain called it correctly. I keep forgetting that you were gone 2.5 days, so you missed out on a lot. When you came back, you were flabbergasted and made your comment. The rest of us saw it coming (the poll), and had blow by blow descriptions of what was happening up to the point of voting. I can understand why you reacted the way you did a little better,now, but in reference to your court comment, the question wasn't whether Donsig ignored the vote, it was whether he violated the Constitution by doing so. Tricky wording applied to ponderance of when ignoring actually takes place, is above and unnecessary for this poll or discussion.

 

[Shaitan]

the question wasn't whether Donsig ignored the vote, it was whether he violated the Constitution by doing so.

That is not what is being polled.

 

[Cyc]

OK, 1 point goes to Shaitan. Sure, make me go back and read the facts . In essence, it is. Dis brought it down to its basic form. Did he or didn't he. It has already been discussed that this may have not been an impartial poll, but it was not misleading, and I doubt very seriously if it was misunderstood. The Duke has already taken steps to insure (at least to him) the investigative polls remain impartial.

As I've stated before, just about everyone admitted that Donsig stepped over the line (for whatever reason). A lot of citizens voted contrary to their original claim, and turned this into the popularity contest it has become. The voting is almost over, let's let it go and move on to the sentencing, which shouldn't be more than the administrative slap of the whatever...

 

[Rain]

Originally posted by Shaitan
Okay, just so everybody knows the kind of problems I see in this poll, here's an example. The poll question is "Did donsig ignore the results of a spot-poll?" The second sentence of the first post (where instructions and poll particulars are supposed to be) is "On the turn chat of June 12th, donsig as designated player called a spot-poll and then ignored the results."

What would happen if a judge instructed the jury "This man killed his butler. I want you to go vote on whether or not he is guilty of killing his butler."

It's just not right!

I agree that the poll could have been better formatted. That being said there has been so much discussion on this issue that i doubt the formatting will affect the outcome significantly. If anything i suppose it provides those supporters of defendant who wish to vote for his acquittal with a salve for their conscience when they do so.

I also think that this thread is not the place to stage additional debate on the issue but that seems to go on anyway without any criticism so i'll just consider that a counterweight to Dis's bias in the scales of justice.

 

[donsig]

Well, hopefully this will all end soon.

 

[Justus II]

I vote no, for the same reasons Shaitan said, in that he did not contradict the poll, he just stopped to get a better feel from the people. Had he continued playing and overruled the poll, then there would be a case, but he didn't "do" anything but stop for a break to look at the bigger picture. I would also award him a medal for taking the initiative and realizing that there were broader impacts to this trade than the money.

P.S. I know I am in the poll thread, not the discussion thread, but I am trying to get caught back up over the past week or so. Unfortunately, it appears that most of the past two weeks have been spent arguing over how we are playing the game (i.e. rules and procedures), and much less time over the direction of our country. No wonder so many citizens lose interest, this seems like it would only be fun for lawyers (I was even a pre-law major way back in the 80's, and it is not much fun for me anymore). Sorry, but I think we have lost our focus.

 

[Cyc]

Thank you. Justus II. It feels like I've been saying that for awhile now.

 

[Chieftess]

----------------------------------------------------
THIS IS A REMINDER: THE VOTE IS ON WHETHER OR NOT DONSIG IGNORED A SPOT VOTE ON THE TRADE DEALS. IT IS NOT ON STOPPING THE GAME
----------------------------------------------------

 

[joespaniel]

Its pretty obvious that this "question" is squarely aimed at getting rid of donsig in a (BIG) partisan fashion.

The entire wording of the "question" is negative in the first place.

Having known donsig for quite some time now, I am 100% sure that his actions were in the best interest of all concerned.

Thus I voted nope, in his favor.

And if certain people continue to attempt these underhanded scemes to topple the "donsig regime", I will personaly form the "Committee to Re-elect The President", ala G. Gordon Liddy style.

Dont make me get prussian on you ...

 

[Knight-Dragon]

I voted no too. Having known donsig for quite some time, I believe he knows what he's doing, trust in his integrity and will stand by him. Enough said.

Besides, it's just a game.

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by Chieftess
----------------------------------------------------
THIS IS A REMINDER: THE VOTE IS ON WHETHER OR NOT DONSIG IGNORED A SPOT VOTE ON THE TRADE DEALS. IT IS NOT ON STOPPING THE GAME
----------------------------------------------------

Yes. You are right. But since he did stop the game, he did not violate the spot vote.

 

[Rain]

This being my last post in this silly enterprise - i'll just point out once again that this is no longer seems even to be an imitation os a serious proceeeding but is simply as someone else described it - a popularity contest. Now that the War-Church is scrounging up votes for Donsig - (we have no parties) i expect the whole proceeding to be overturned. Well its good to see the spirit of OJ has found a home.

Free Ads for Donsig's party

I just wanted all my old friends in the War Church to know that I haven't forgotten them now that I'm president!

Join the Knights of the War Church!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brother donsig, just wish to let you know you'll have the full might of the War Church behind you all the way.


I wish you all the best in whatever pleasure you derive from this curious enterprise.

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by Rain
This being my last post in this silly enterprise - i'll just point out once again that this is no longer seems even to be an imitation os a serious proceeeding but is simply as someone else described it - a popularity contest. Now that the War-Church is scrounging up votes for Donsig - (we have no parties) i expect the whole proceeding to be overturned. Well its good to see the spirit of OJ has found a home.

Free Ads for Donsig's party

I just wanted all my old friends in the War Church to know that I haven't forgotten them now that I'm president!

Join the Knights of the War Church!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brother donsig, just wish to let you know you'll have the full might of the War Church behind you all the way.


I wish you all the best in whatever pleasure you derive from this curious enterprise.

Well, had this fiasco not started in the first place....

 

[Shaitan]

I am not supporting donsig because we are chums. At best, we are acquaintances. We have butted heads on as many issues as we've agreed on. I'm supporting him on this issue because he did not break the rules.

Rain referred to the OJ trial and that floored me because that's exactly what I was thinking of, only the opposite way. The prosecution here is doing exactly what the Simson defense did. Everything possible has been brought up as reasons to find donsig guilty, no matter how ridiculous, and the actual point of contention has been suppressed and treated as a non-issue. In addition, there is rampant badgering and insults to anybody who speaks up in donsig's behalf. According to the prosecution, anybody who supports donsig here is either dishonest, idiotic or part of a conspiracy. Unbelievable!

Did donsig take any action in violation of the decision of the poll? NO

Did donsig take any action that would even conceivably make it impossible for the poll decision to be carried out? NO

Those are the facts.

 

[Cyc]

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzz. Let's put this one away?

OOPS! Forgot the smiley faces...

 

[Shaitan]

Good idea Cyc. What do we do here? The poll ended at 12-12-3 (according to the run time posted in the first post).

We've never had a tie vote before and we don't have a provision for a tie-breaker on a poll of this type. We can't give this tie-breaking power to an official at this point as all of the official's positions are known and that would be unfair to one side or the other (for the purposes of this case, that is).

Declare a hung jury? That would indicate a retrial.

Abandon the case? That could set a bad precedent.

Send it to a higher court? That would be a Council Vote or maybe a moderator judgement.

 

[eyrei]

I think that one of the mods would break the tie here.

 

[Cyc]

Looks like the Duke just voted. Breaking the tie and saving us a decision.