Term 5- Judiciary: Law and Sleepless Nights

[gert-janl]

So...nothing is going to happen here untill demogame IV is over?

This is really an insult to both the demogame and our constitution. Just because of a small, though ongoing for some time..., argument between donsig and Cyc, the judiciary is doing nothing? Come on...we have around 10 days left to restore the reputation of the judiciary. Let's see what we can do!

 

[Chieftess]

Back in DG1 and 2, the process was simple (and I said it before).

1 - A user puts in a PI request.
2 - The judiciary member in charge (or whoever was in charge at the time in DG1) would set up a PI thread stating, "User X has issued a PI on user Y. Both parties will find someone to represent them, if they wish, and User X will state their arguments, then user Y".
3 - After the two posted, discussion would start in that thread.
4 - After 48 hours, a guilty/innocent poll was put up (lasted 72 hours IIRC).
5 - If found guilty, a sentencing poll was put up (another 72 hours).

Yes, the process was a week long, but it was a lot better than this.

 

[ravensfire]

Back in DG1 and 2, the process was simple (and I said it before).

1 - A user puts in a PI request.
2 - The judiciary member in charge (or whoever was in charge at the time in DG1) would set up a PI thread stating, "User X has issued a PI on user Y. Both parties will find someone to represent them, if they wish, and User X will state their arguments, then user Y".
3 - After the two posted, discussion would start in that thread.
4 - After 48 hours, a guilty/innocent poll was put up (lasted 72 hours IIRC).
5 - If found guilty, a sentencing poll was put up (another 72 hours).

Yes, the process was a week long, but it was a lot better than this.

Oh why bother. You'll always bring up the glorious, grass is greener past.

I give up - stay in the past, dreaming of the glories of yesteryear.

-- Ravensfire

 

[eyrei]

Oh why bother. You'll always bring up the glorious, grass is greener past.

I give up - stay in the past, dreaming of the glories of yesteryear.

-- Ravensfire

I think her point is that it used to work pretty efficiently...

 

[ravensfire]

I think her point is that it used to work pretty efficiently...

True, but under entirely different circumstances. In addition, it was more than anything, a popularity contest. If you were liked, you could get away with quite a bit. If you weren't liked, you couldn't.

The new system, that CT is so disparaging of, has something that DG1/2/3 never thought of - a remedy, agreed by the parties, before any trial happens. Nope! Gotta have the whole thing in DG1/2/3.

Sorry, the problems currently encountered would have been mitigated only slightly under the old system. The first cases were delayed in part because there was a chance of being dropped and in part from finding representation. Nothing in the old system would have prevented that. Nothing.

I cannot comment on any other court's term, just Term 2.

CT, you're barking up the wrong tree on this one. There is more at fault than the system. If you want a great example of how it CAN work - look at the case you brought in term 2, and the case against CG in term 1. Both were handled far, far faster than the DG1/2 system you are so fond of.

Don't blame the CC system for failings outside of it.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Bootstoots]

We don't need to use the PI system of DG1 and 2, but we need to work on the efficiency of ours. Borrowing some ideas from those games may help. We need to make this CC process more efficient for next DG.

 

[Bootstoots]

The remedy system is a great idea, if only we could find a court that would handle CC's using that system in an expedient manner. As it is, they've done virtually nothing since Term 2.

 

[Chieftess]

Ok, RF, then tell me. How is this system better at handling reviews and PIs/CCs in DG4 than it was in DG1 and 2?

Apparently, all the DG1 and 2 PIs and reviews were completed on time. Something obviously worked then.

 

[ravensfire]

Ok, RF, then tell me. How is this system better at handling reviews and PIs/CCs in DG4 than it was in DG1 and 2?

Apparently, all the DG1 and 2 PIs and reviews were completed on time. Something obviously worked then.

CT, you seemed to have missed some of my points. I'll try again.

In term 1, there was one CC filed. It was handled quickly via a remedy. In that particular case, representation for both parties, if needed, was found quickly.

At the end of term 1, 2 CC's were filed, and requested to be handled by term 2.

In term 2, there were 2 CC's pushed from term 1, plus one cc filed. The first 2 cc's were initially delayed to handle the JR over the elections and to establich firmly the members of the court. Once that was done, the first two CC's were delayed at first from hope they could be resolved without the CC process. Indeed, one of them became a JR.

Once the decision was made to press the case forward, representation could not be found for some time. So tell me, how would the DR1/2 process handle that? The same way - it would get delayed.

The last CC in term 2 was handled quickly - you should remember that one.

CT - there is nothing wrong with the process. Period. We had a sitting justice volunteer to step down for a case to ensure a citizen had representation that they have a right to. How would this have been handled in DR1/2? Through the JA/PD - god, I hope not. We've had some spectacularly incompetant citizens in those offices, which is why they don't exist anymore. That system was broken - and badly. Expediance is not a substitute for justice. Speed is not a substitute for fairness. The old system was a farce of justice, where popularity ruled the day. Under that old, antiquated system, certain citizens could not get a fair trial - and the bias would go both ways.

Yes - I'm unhappy with the delays. I was unhappy when I couldn't resolve every case brought up in term 2. Heck - I still have a CC on my head that you filed. There are problems - but it's with participation of citizens. What is a court supposed to do if nobody wants to represent another citizen? Having a justice step down is a solution, but it stinks.

You want things to move faster? Get off your tail and volunteer to represent one side or the other. Stop being part of the problem.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Bill_in_PDX]

In my opinion, the reason DG1 and 2 worked was that the time limit was imposed on the case, and representation was provided by the court itself (JA was prosecutor and PD the defense council unless the accused wanted someone else to defend them). The timeline forced the process to complete.

Is that better or worse? I don't know. The grass was greener in some ways, but in others, it was worse because you could file a PI for just about anthing.

However, it is clearly a problem if either side can use "lack of representation" to stall the process itself.

Just my view.

 

[zorven]

Just my $0.02 on how to prevent the delays we are seeing with the current CC system. Our system allows for the defendent and plaintiff to have someone else represent them. This fine, but if nobody can be found to do this, the defendent and plaintiff should be forced to represent themselves rather than continuing to delay the case hoping that one day someone might step forward and volunteer.

 

[donsig]

I think her point is that it used to work pretty efficiently...

That's not how you or CT felt back during PI6 or when CT was PIed a few times by Cyc. The old process did not work well and that's why we tried something new. The new CC system doesn't work as well as we'd like it to so we should try something new (not something old).

 

[Zarn]

Sorry about leaving guys, but I didn't see any other choice.

Cyc: We were at this point (as far as my knowledge goes about the case):

CoL L.1.
 f.  The Prosecutor and the Defense then present the 
        results of the investigation to the Court.
      1.  The Court should be skeptical of all allegations, 
          requiring a reasonable chance the allegation is 
          true and determining that, if the allegation is 
          true, a violation of Fanatican law has occurred.

Only later do I set up a polls and threads. I don’t think we were at the same point in the process.

I don't know what you were talking about with political purposes.

As for the schedule, you were only Justice for those cases, so there was no need for you to ‘wait around.’ You knew that it was the 22nd as did the Defense, Prosecution, and I but had no idea what they were doing at the time (22nd). I simply didn’t hear from them. I could have had EVERYTHING done by terms end, even after the silent defense and prosecution.

 

[Chieftess]

Why would the legal clutz volunteer for the defense or prosecution?