Jump to content

Full Authority Judges


Recommended Posts

 

Why do you care? You were not involved and clearly none of the ones involved want to make this public. At least not at this point. And if a conclusion was reached I am pretty sure both parties (or 3 or 4 or how many there were) are ok with the decision that was taken,

 

Because everybody involved was human and if humans are involved I will always suspect foul play.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 81
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I'd rather PREVENT something from going wrong in the first place.

Two of them needed to agree on any one topic, and two of the three are [redacted] very close irl. Although in a perfect world such ties will not influence decisions made ingame there is lots of potent

This fuss is a big stupidity.   Previously Secret people took the decisions and nobody complained.   They could made anything and you could not point your fingers to anyone cause you didn't knew w

I don't like the idea that some people have secret trials, I thought they are supposed to be public, I haven't seen it said anywhere that you get a option to make trial private. I just don't like special standards, by having those trials private both parties are protected from public destruction of reputation, I find it very unfair for those in the past that had public trials in which reputation of some people were completely annihilated. Better make it fair so that everybody gets to have the private trial. Second thing I don't like is that private trials are opaque as Rophs already said.

 

Really make up your mind how trials are working, I honestly don't like double standards. I would prefer if it all was public and transparent, also if something really is for trial then somebody's reputation shouldn't be protected by making all this secret. If something bad was done then the reputation will go bye bye in accordance to how bad that thing was, if accusation was wrong then accuser's reputation would very likely drop by making false claims. Simple, why is somebody being protected like this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, if people wanted it hushed up and private, the whole warrant thing shouldnt have been announced as well. Its like someone wanted to boast about something which couldnt be disclosed... :)) If they expect that there wont be any outburst after that, then they are stupid. :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has it ever been thought that releasing the information would be detrimental to the community and or to those involved?

I have never seen a single instance where anything of serious nature could have been contained in a neutral, or even a positive manner. It's always an explosion of nastiness.
 

Has it also, ever, been thought that perhaps the trials involve far more serious crimes than theft? Than shop fraud? It would not have been implemented for petty crimes in the way that it has.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has it ever been thought that releasing the information would be detrimental to the community and or to those involved?
I have never seen a single instance where anything of serious nature could have been contained in a neutral, or even a positive manner. It's always an explosion of nastiness.
 
Has it also, ever, been thought that perhaps the trials involve far more serious crimes than theft? Than shop fraud? It would not have been implemented for petty crimes in the way that it has.


If stuff like rape can be plastered all over the forum, my imagination fails to help me think about something worse which cannot be revealed. Especially if its related to autumn 2kwhatever.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, if people wanted it hushed up and private, the whole warrant thing shouldnt have been announced as well. Its like someone wanted to boast about something which couldnt be disclosed... :)) If they expect that there wont be any outburst after that, then they are stupid. :P

 

At the request of Mur, the entire situation is to be kept confidential and between only those involved. 

 

Therefore, I agree that the announcement should not have been made. Nobody involved knew he was going to make it.

 

Although I agree that the announcement was rather ill-advised, I think insinuating that Mur is boastful and "stupid" is taking it a little too far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If stuff like rape can be plastered all over the forum, my imagination fails to help me think about something worse which cannot be revealed. Especially if its related to autumn 2kwhatever.

Personally that should have probably been dealt with privately...


 

Therefore, I agree that the announcement should not have been made. Nobody involved knew he was going to make it.

 

Mur does that... a lot... Many times he has made announcements without actually discussing it with those involved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At the request of Mur, the entire situation is to be kept confidential and between only those involved. 
 
Therefore, I agree that the announcement should not have been made. Nobody involved knew he was going to make it.
 
Although I agree that the announcement was rather ill-advised, I think insinuating that Mur is boastful and "stupid" is taking it a little too far.


Oh was it Mur who was responsible? I take my words back. He is never at fault and doesn't deserve to be called stupid and boastful like any other player would've been in his place. My apologies. I am at fault here. :)
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh was it Mur who was responsible? I take my words back. He is never at fault and doesn't deserve to be called stupid and boastful like any other player would've been in his place. My apologies. I am at fault here. :)

 

Please don't be obtuse, Nimrodel. I was commenting on the nature of what you said rather than who it was aimed at. I even said the announcement should not have been made... is that not a fault?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are possibilities of worse. Or even confidential/private that does not deserve the knowledge of the public. 
 
I will not comment on the Magistra incident.

I dont think magistra's was the only incident in md history. There was also that case of redneck misbehaving with mwbrady's gf... Lunar priestess was it? Or lunar goddess? Anyway... That isnt important atm. And probably off topic as well. Edited by Nimrodel
Link to post
Share on other sites

NOT make an announcement about people able to sentence you without comments? If i would have done that you would have accused me of other things.

 

The rape incident was idiotic and i am sorry i have occasionally to deal with such stuff... redneck case makes me laugh each time i think of it. it was first time i heard of a virtual rape, and not till today can i understand how that works exactly, technically speaking :))

 

Same way, people with mental issues should not be allowed to affect other members, but its almost impossible to determine that about anyone, because they actually feel what they speak and deal with things according to what their mind tells them is real...regardless if they are parallel with the reality of others....sadly..i have no solution to that...but md itself learned to eiminate bad cells... Some trials might be delayed occasionally to see how the mentality of some changes. These are not trials based on law..so they should take advantage of anything able to help the judges take a fair decision...fair does not always mean just however. Judges are, without explicitly beeing told, taking care of sick situations that are too complicated to deal otherwise but threaten md's health, or the people involved are of too great power to be punished or obey no law. For some cases, raw force is needed to put an end to the situation. Normally i was doing the killing arround here...now i passed this to the judges. It will be their personality that will influence the contents of their decisions, and your rections that will teach them about how to deal next time. My warrants just keep them from being weak and turn arround to any decision later. Their judging is a great effort that they do trying to do good, not to make favors or to get revenge... however...if their actions might be interpreted as personal, i am willing to cover their back anyhow, basically giving them a mask they can put on if they think its needed. For example lets say the judge is citizen of a land, and has to judge a case where the king is involved...a mask might be useful.

 

 

Having a limited number of warrants will make them be better judges each time and not turn into tyrans ...because if they want to keep the role, they need to be elected for it next time..

 

IF a judge goes rogue, he still needs an other one to back him up. Now, that other is also rogue, or so stupid or ignorant not to realise something is wrong. In these cases, the decisions remain standing...scars on md are painful, but stability in decisions i far more important...and scars give personality to anyone ;) ..same way like with the land kings...no questions asked...because WHATEVER they will do , what they do remains as part of what md is.

Worst thing kings and judges could do is to be inactive and keep the positions occupied but not be there, thats in my opinion a worse crime tham going wild and do stuff others don't like.

 

 

The judges can keep a trial private, but participants in it could make it public...the point was to allow cases where all agree that things should be kept private...to avoid later comments and rumors. If you have something to fight about with someone, then deal with that someone and not the public. If it conerns the public, then scream about it loud...both cases can happen with the judges system.

Link to post
Share on other sites

NOT make an announcement about people able to sentence you without comments? If i would have done that you would have accused me of other things.

 

Not really because whole thing was private and nobody knew about it. Now is no longer private and rumors are flying on all sides. It's rumored that involved parties are either Chew, kings or councilors.

 

The judges can keep a trial private, but participants in it could make it public...the point was to allow cases where all agree that things should be kept private...to avoid later comments and rumors. If you have something to fight about with someone, then deal with that someone and not the public. If it conerns the public, then scream about it loud...both cases can happen with the judges system.

 

Problem is you haven't said it anywhere before that trial can be a private (secret) one, as much as I see until now all trials were de facto public, nobody was aware of option to make their trials private.

 

or the people involved are of too great power to be punished or obey no law.

 

Which would mean that "bone marrow" of MD got "cancer". I think that many will dislike that red part of quote.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Background

 

Whether or not the just and right exist, much, if not all all, of what we perceive as just and right is perceived so solely by the appearance of being just and right. Though that earlier question poses whether there is anything beyond said appearance which might be sought, regardless, that we can grasp no just and right but those goes to say that we should still strive for the aforementioned illusion; even if there is no higher truth to support it.

 

Hence, a trial has ended ideally when those parties involved and those observing it all believe the just and right has been undertaken; though, in theory, the greater priority, where that is not possible, is that those external observers  perceive it as such, in effect, it is the executive party's view that is often imposed.

 

Ultimately, whether or not the trial is generally denounced as just and right then becomes a matter of how closely aligned the executive party's decisions as witnessed are aligned to the views of those external observers.

 

Though the executive party seeking general acclaim in its decision might, itself, be considered a form of bias, should a transcendent just and right be assumed, likewise, the view of that minority claiming for such just and right could be said, itself, to be a particular view of the just and right, dissonant with that of most observers, and none too different from those other decisions the executive party might have undertaken against general opinion.

 

While the right and wrong are, philosophically, by and large untenable, the common moral values of that society, within a tribunal, though diffuse and none too universal, can be reduced to sufficiently familiar grounds that the right, or rather, a generally accepted version thereof, can be found and applied to particular instances.

 

Main

 

The three judges appointed by Mur were, according to him, appointed as the executive party in the very same fashion they'd be in most traditional societies, prior to proper institutionalization of the judiciary system: according to their influence. And note that, to date, many Supreme Tribunals, much more so than lesser instances, still appoint their members by prestige, rather than by a standardized evaluation procedure.

 

Though the merit of such methodology may be questioned, that it has stood in MD for years goes to say that such a matter is deeply ingrained within it. Far too widespread and overreaching to discuss herein, a discussion pointing this direction should be undertaken not in particularity, as applied to this case, but in another topic altogether.

 

The catch is that, such as the traditional occupiers of those roles - the sovereigns themselves, originally - Ailith, dst and Granos are not held accountable for their decisions by a de facto holder of power higher or parallel to them in the hierarchy, for Mur has opened hand of such a role. They may be held accountable for their actions by their fellow players, but only so to the extent that said player base is able and willing to hold them accountable for such; therein included official roles.

 

As said players are unlikely to be sufficiently willing or able to react in force, it must be ultimately said that the judges are not held accountable to anything but their own views or wariness of damaging their image before the community. That notion is, in all likelihood, one which bothers many of those who have expressed their opinions contrary to the appointment as is; much more so than the actual possibility of which guarantees might prove necessary. The other being the method of appointment, as commented upon above.

 

Should the unexpected come to pass and any perceived abuse ensue, we will most likely grudgingly bear along. Nevertheless, I find it exceedingly unlikely that such might come to pass, as I find it unlikely that the three might outright abuse their role, as opposed to merely taking the odd unpopular decision. Though there is nothing to be done in this particular regard, whether or not they will prove a good fit for the role, whether by happy coincidence or sheer skill, remains to be seen. The odds strike me as better than most. 

Edited by Azthor
Link to post
Share on other sites

Think of it this way:

They have been appointed and their decision is final, no one (not even Mur) can overrule them and there is nothing you can do about that.

Mur wanted them so they are very likely to stay even if everyone hates the idea of some hidden "surpreme court".

I think that each one of them has enough MD knowledge and sheer common sense to ensure that decisions are appropiate however if we are all going to be unable to overrule them, any decisions they make could have the power to drastically change MD one way or other. I am undecided how I feel about this, I always think you should be able to question and discuss decisions.

So, say all you want, we all are not going to get rid of them, Mur is in hibernations, so they are here to stay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i think i stated clear that they are here to stay. I gave them warrants so that eventually their authority runs out, at that time your opinions here on the forum will matter, till then they are just an interesting read, but these judges will not be changed based on any complain till their warrants run out. 

 

It is my opinion that i picked these judges as best as possible from any existing options... of course you might question that. Anyway regardless how well i picked them, what they will do will add up to the flavor of the law system in MD...good or bad, regardless how it is.

 

and last point, keeping a trial silent does not mean its worse than other trials, it only means that public image degradation or alteration of involved characters should not be considered as collateral damage to any decision taken. The tiral could have been about a major crime or simple misscommunication conflict, either way, it was a trial that needed the decision of an outside party that was not myself. You can rant as much as you want based on speculations and rumors of who was involved or how they where involved in the last trial, it will be only your imagination. The related announcement only sais basically that the first silent trial happened, and thats all...the rest is subject to rumors of all sorts..


ps. think that i would have called the support of the judges also if it was me involved in whatever happend...that doesn't mean that i commited any "crime" but that for some reason, there was no other way to reach a conclusion other than a sudden, outside, one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I gave them warrants so that eventually their authority runs out, at that time your opinions here on the forum will matter, till then they are just an interesting read, but these judges will not be changed based on any complain till their warrants run out.

 

do those oppinions really matter then? lets say the warrants ran out, how do we know whether the same judges need to be appointed again or not if the trials were kept secret? Basically all people who were parts of trials and therefore know the details cannot be considered impartial, so you (Mur) cannot rely on their oppinions here on forum and those who are impartial are unaware...stalemate situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's always been a few trials and punishment-thingies that were kept secret, regardless if it was Mur-Level or LHO-Level. Some things just can't be common knowledge, like serious bug abuses, things that concern the RL of someone involved etc.

 

It doesn't look very good that the first thing the judges had to do was something secret, but that's just an odd occurence. Wait for the next 2-3 things that come up, then make up your mind about the system.

If they do everything in secret, there's a problem, but 1 case doesn't set a trend :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Forum Statistics

    16,160
    Total Topics
    176,441
    Total Posts

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
  • Recent Event Reviews

×
×
  • Create New...