First, I want to note that I intend to abstain on the majority of votes moving forward. Even if they involve my own ideas. I do not have a nation in Lazarus, and simply wish to provide my input on things. So I will do so.
Idea: For civil disputes, we determine two judges from a pool of available volunteers by lottery. The two judges have three days to reach consensus about an outcome.
If they do not agree on every detail after three days, a coin is flipped, and the winner of the coin flip gets to decide the outcome without input from the other judge. The community can vote to overturn the decision made by a single judge with a 60% vote, and the decision of two judges with a 75% vote. Or something.
I think this would be much more entertaining than an actual court system. Furthermore, writing a law that maximizes the feasibility and merit of such an unusual system would be a rewarding challenge.
---
Additionally, I do not believe that crimes like conspiracy/attempting to coup/raiding Lazarene colonies/espionage should be a crime. I say this not in my own self-interest (I have no stake in the game), but because I think it'd help us retain high-quality players, maintain goodwill in the community, and keep things spicy. Instead, discipline should only involve preventing offenders from repeating their actions. So if someone is caught sharing private intelligence, for instance, they should be allowed to remain a Lazarene, but be stripped of their access to classified forums.
If they still want to contribute in a community where everyone is salty at them, then they should be allowed to look pathetic doing so. On the other hand, if there isn't a ton of salt in their direction ... then they shouldn't be banned to begin with. No?
Try to tart your way to the delegacy? You get a lower endocap.
Try to give away intel? You don't get access anymore.
Try to rig a vote? You lose your voting privileges.
Of course, we can also go with this thread's original proposal. It doesn't sound as fun to me, but then again "fun" isn't what most people look for in a judicial system.
Idea: For civil disputes, we determine two judges from a pool of available volunteers by lottery. The two judges have three days to reach consensus about an outcome.
If they do not agree on every detail after three days, a coin is flipped, and the winner of the coin flip gets to decide the outcome without input from the other judge. The community can vote to overturn the decision made by a single judge with a 60% vote, and the decision of two judges with a 75% vote. Or something.
I think this would be much more entertaining than an actual court system. Furthermore, writing a law that maximizes the feasibility and merit of such an unusual system would be a rewarding challenge.
---
Additionally, I do not believe that crimes like conspiracy/attempting to coup/raiding Lazarene colonies/espionage should be a crime. I say this not in my own self-interest (I have no stake in the game), but because I think it'd help us retain high-quality players, maintain goodwill in the community, and keep things spicy. Instead, discipline should only involve preventing offenders from repeating their actions. So if someone is caught sharing private intelligence, for instance, they should be allowed to remain a Lazarene, but be stripped of their access to classified forums.
If they still want to contribute in a community where everyone is salty at them, then they should be allowed to look pathetic doing so. On the other hand, if there isn't a ton of salt in their direction ... then they shouldn't be banned to begin with. No?
Try to tart your way to the delegacy? You get a lower endocap.
Try to give away intel? You don't get access anymore.
Try to rig a vote? You lose your voting privileges.
Of course, we can also go with this thread's original proposal. It doesn't sound as fun to me, but then again "fun" isn't what most people look for in a judicial system.
Quote:Embassy opened with Fishmongers.
Quote:Embassy closed with Milograd is The Eternal Delegate of TSP.