Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 63

Thread: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

  1. #1
    Muizer's Avatar member 3519
    Patrician Artifex Magistrate

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    11,087

    Default Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    Changes from the current Civitates behaviour act:

    Counselling and censure proceedings stay more or less what they are, but Ostrakons are mediated by, rather than pursued by the Consilium de Civitate:

    • In cases of Ostrakon brought by a Civitate, the accuser will be appointed as prosecutor, in the case of Ostrakon brought on behalf of staff the Curator is appointed prosecutor.
    • The Consilium de Civitate cannot dismiss charges but can advise against proceeding with the Ostrakon.
    • If the accuser proceeds against the advice of the CdC and fails to obtain a conviction he himself will be subject to Censure proceedings.


    In addition, the act is changed to ensure no civitates lose their rank until they are convicted.

    Quote Originally Posted by final draft
    Civitates Behaviour Act Revision

    The Civitates behaviour act shall be replaced with the following text

    If a Civitates is found to be acting in opposition to the rules of the forum and Curia, or is otherwise neglecting his duties or carrying about in a manner unbefitting his position, he may be approached for counselling, censured or demoted for his behaviour. No Civitate may be found guilty in more than one action for the same offence.

    Action of Counseling:

    The Consilium de Civitate has the power to privately contact Civitates which it feels are not maintaining a high enough standard. The members of the Consilium de Civitate would then review the Civitates posts over an agreed period of time and attempt to help the Civitate improve their posts. This work is kept strictly confidential and only the Civitate in question can mention that it is happening. At the end of the agreed timescale the Consilium de Civitate can choose to take further disciplinary action.


    Action of Censure:

    Initiation:
    No civitates' rank shall be involuntarily suspended except through the process of censure.
    A majority of the Consilium de Civitate can initiate censure. Any Civitates wishing to bring to the attention of the Curia the behaviour of a civitate has to do so by PM addressed to a member of the Consilium de Civitate. The Consilium de Civitate can adopt or dismiss the accusations. No Civitates may be censured for his behaviour except by means of the procedure defined below.

    Procedure:
    Once an accusation has been brought forwards either by one of the aforementioned bodies or by another member and has been subsequently adopted by the Consilium de Civitate, the civitates is notified by PM. A civitate who is under accusation can opt either to defend themselves or request a champion to defend them.

    The defendant or their designated champion has 3 days to prepare their case. On the 4th day the Consilium de Civitate opens a thread in the Quaestio Perpetua in which to hear the case. The Consilium de Civitate then appoints one of its members as prosecutor for the case, and the prosecutor and the champion/defendant debate the case in the appropriate thread for 7 days. No other member can post in this thread.

    When the 7 days are up the prosecutor may suggest a suitable punishment from the list below. The Consilium de Civitate will then close the thread and decide on what they think is a suitable course of action. The maximum time allowed to decide is one week. This choice is confirmed by a simple majority vote for or against the chosen course of action. The acting prosecutor will not take part in the vote. Councillors of the CdeC are encouraged to abstain from voting if they feel their judgement may be unacceptably influenced by bias.

    Possible courses in an action of Censure include but are not limited to:
    Dismissal of the case.
    Warning, the Civitates will automatically be suspended from the Civitate rank for 1 month if he receives a Warning within the next 3 months.
    Suspension of Civitates rank for up to 1 month.
    Re-trial under Action of Ostrakon.

    Appeal:
    Consilium de Civitate decisions may only be appealed to the general Curia if more than 2 members of the Consilium de Civitate voted against it. If an appeal is made a thread is opened by the Consilium de Civitate in the Curia Vote and all Civitates can vote on the judgement with the following options:
    Judgement remains unaltered.
    Judgement is increased by one level.
    Judgement is reduced by one level.


    Action of Ostrakon:

    Initiation:
    No Civitates' rank shall be involuntarily removed except through the process of Ostrakon.
    If a Civitate holds three unexpired warnings they are immediately subject to these proceedings. Charges will be brought by the Curator on behalf of staff. Any Civitate can bring charges of Ostrakon by sending a PM to the Consilium de Civitate. The Consilium de Civitate may advise against the Ostrakon by a majority vote. If the accuser proceeds with the case against the advice of the Consilium de Civitate and fails to obtain a conviction, the accuser will be subject to Censure proceedings.

    Procedure:
    Once an accusation has been brought forwards, the Consilium de Civitate will notify the accused Civitates by PM. A civitate who is under accusation can opt either to defend themselves or request a champion to defend them. The Consilium de Civitate will appoint the Curator or Civitates who brought the accusation as prosecutor for the case. This task cannot be delegated.

    The defendant or their designated champion has 3 days to prepare their case. On the 4th day the Consilium de Civitate opens a thread in the Quaestio Perpetua in which to hear the case. The prosecutor and the champion/defendant debate the case in the appropriate thread for 7 days. No other member can post in this thread. When the 7 days are up, the debate is over and the prosecutor will announce the suggested penalty. The Consilium de Civitate then close the debate thread and open a new thread in the Curia Vote sub-forum stating the names of the accused and prosecutor, and the suggested penalty recieved from the prosecutor. A Private poll will be attached with 4 options:
    Convict the accused.
    propose Censure instead of Ostrakon
    Dismiss the case
    Abstain.

    The poll will remain open for 7 days. Conviction and Dismissal require a majority of non abstaining voters to pass. If neither option acquires a majority of non abstaining votes the case is referred to the Consilium de Civitate to be tried as a case of Censure.













    Quote Originally Posted by first draft
    Civitates Behavior Act

    If a Civitates is found to be acting in opposition to the rules of the forum and Curia, or is otherwise neglecting his duties or carrying about in a manner unbefitting his position, he may be approached for councelling, censured or demoted for his behaviour.

    Councelling
    The Consilium de Civitate has the power to privately contact Civitates which it feels are not maintaining a high enough standard. The members of the Consilium de Civitate would then review the Civitates posts over an agreed period of time (usually 1 month) and attempt to help the Civitate improve their posts. This work is kept strictly confidential and only the Civitate in question can mention that it is happening. At the end of the agreed timescale the Consilium de Civitate can take further disciplinary action if required (including extending the period of help).

    Censure
    No civitates'rank shall be involuntarily suspended except through the process of censure.
    A majority of the members of the Triumvirate or the Consilium de Civitate can initiate censure. If the Triumvirate initiate such a proceeding it is then handed over to the Consilium de Civitate to manage. Any Civitates wishing to bring to the attention of the Curia the behaviour of a civitate has to do so by PM addressed to a member of the Consilium de Civitate. The Consilium de Civitate can adopt or dismiss the accusations. No Civitates may be censured for his behaviour except by means of the procedure defined below.

    Once an accusation has been brought forwards either by one of the aforementioned bodies or by another member and has been subsequently adopted by the Consilium de Civitate the civitates is notified by PM. A civitate who is under accusation can opt either to defend themselves or request a champion to defend them, Champions must be a Civitate and would normally be the Civitate's patron. If the Patron declines, is not available or does not exist, the Civitate may agree with someone else to be their Champion.

    The Civitate/Champion has 3 days to prepare their case. On the 4th day the Consilium de Civitate opens a thread in the Quaestio Perpetua in which to hear the case. The Consilium de Civitate then appoints one of its members as prosecutor for the case, and the prosecutor and the champion/defendant debate the case in the appropriate thread for 7 days. No other member can post in this thread. When the 7 days are up the Consilium de Civitate close the thread and decide on a punishment. This choice is confirmed by a simple majority vote for or against the chosen punishment. The acting prosecutor will not take part in the vote.

    After the case is debated the Consilium de Civitate can decide one of the following:
    Dismissal of the case
    Warning, the Civitates will automatically be suspended from the Civitate rank for 1 month if he receives a Warning within the next 3 months.
    Suspension of Civitates rank for up to 1 month

    Consilium de Civitate decisions may only be appealed to the general Curia if more than 2 members of the Consilium de Civitate voted against it. If an appeal is made a thread is opened by the Consilium de Civitate in the Curia Vote and all Civitates can vote on the judgement with the following options:
    Judgement remains unaltered
    Judgement is increased by one level
    Judgement is reduced by one level

    Ostrakon
    No Civitates' rank shall be involuntarily removed except through the process of Ostrakon.
    If a Civitate holds three unexpired warnings they are immediately subject to these proceedings. Charges will be brought by the Curator on behalf of staff. Any civitate can bring charges of Ostrakon by sending a PM to the Consilium de Civitate.
    Once an accusation has been brought forwards, the Consilium de Civitate will notify the accused Civitates by PM. A civitate who is under accusation can opt either to defend themselves or request a champion to defend them, Champions must be a Civitate and would normally be the Civitate's patron. If the Patron declines, is not available or does not exist, the Civitate may agree with someone else to be their Champion. The Consilium de Civitate will appoint the Curator or Civitates who brought the accusation as prosecutor for the case. This task cannot be delegated.

    The Civitate/Champion has 3 days to prepare their case. On the 4th day the Consilium de Civitate opens a thread in the Quaestio Perpetua in which to hear the case. The prosecutor and the champion/defendant debate the case in the appropriate thread for 7 days. No other member can post in this thread. When the 7 days are up, the prosecutor announces the demanded penalty. The Consilium de Civitate close the thread and open a poll in the Curia vote subforum stating the name of the accused and prosecutor, the penalty demanded and options to absolve or condemn the accused. The poll will remain open for 7 days. Conviction requires a 2/3 majority.
    Once proceedings are concluded the Counsilium de Civitate will review the process. Frivolous use of the Ostrakon is grounds to initiate Censure.
    Last edited by Muizer; June 16, 2006 at 07:17 AM.
    "Lay these words to heart, Lucilius, that you may scorn the pleasure which comes from the applause of the majority. Many men praise you; but have you any reason for being pleased with yourself, if you are a person whom the many can understand?" - Lucius Annaeus Seneca -

  2. #2
    Garbarsardar's Avatar Et Slot i et slot
    Patrician Tribune Citizen Magistrate Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    20,615

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    Could you use the existing legislation and highlight the changes? You can use Blue for added text and red for removed.

    It will make it more readable...
    Last edited by Garbarsardar; June 08, 2006 at 06:24 AM.

  3. #3
    Muizer's Avatar member 3519
    Patrician Artifex Magistrate

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    11,087

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    Quote Originally Posted by Garbarsardar
    Could you use the existing legislation and highlight the cahanges? You can use Blue for addd text and red for removed.

    It will make it more readable...
    Actually I started doing that, but it only made it more confusing, because little has stayed in its original place. In all, censure remains more or less as it is, but Ostrakon is split off. It keeps what I consider the good things (a prosecutor and defender in a subforum) but places the responsibility for initiating the ostrakon back squarely on the shoulders of the individual civitate bringing the charges with the CdC in charge of evaluating "frivolous abuse".
    "Lay these words to heart, Lucilius, that you may scorn the pleasure which comes from the applause of the majority. Many men praise you; but have you any reason for being pleased with yourself, if you are a person whom the many can understand?" - Lucius Annaeus Seneca -

  4. #4
    Tom Paine's Avatar Mr Common Sense
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Silver Spring, Maryland (inside the Beltway)
    Posts
    33,698

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    Muiz, just, highlight the changes, and make it possible for us to see them, please... that big block of text loses me... please?
    - No accused will lose their rank before they are condemned
    What about the effect of the three-warning suspension and Ostrakon, though?

    And on the first, the CdeC is thinking about simply accepting all charges unless 2 CdeC members formally complain and say it should be dismissed, and that's something we need to sort out, if that's okay with you.

  5. #5
    Spiff's Avatar That's Ffips backwards
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    6,436

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    Since this is such a large block of text we're trying to manage, i propose it be split into distinct sections as i have done below. Note i havent changed the wording of anything, just added section haeadings


    Civitates Behaviour Act Revision

    The Civitates behaviour act shall be replaced with the following text



    If a Civitates is found to be acting in opposition to the rules of the forum and Curia, or is otherwise neglecting his duties or carrying about in a manner unbefitting his position, he may be approached for councelling, censured or demoted for his behaviour.

    Action of Councelling:
    The Consilium de Civitate has the power to privately contact Civitates which it feels are not maintaining a high enough standard. The members of the Consilium de Civitate would then review the Civitates posts over an agreed period of time (usually 1 month) and attempt to help the Civitate improve their posts. This work is kept strictly confidential and only the Civitate in question can mention that it is happening. At the end of the agreed timescale the Consilium de Civitate can take further disciplinary action if required (including extending the period of help).


    Action of Censure:
    Initiation:
    No civitates' rank shall be involuntarily suspended except through the process of censure.
    A majority of the members of the Triumvirate or the Consilium de Civitate can initiate censure. If the Triumvirate initiate such a proceeding it is then handed over to the Consilium de Civitate to manage. Any Civitates wishing to bring to the attention of the Curia the behaviour of a civitate has to do so by PM addressed to a member of the Consilium de Civitate. The Consilium de Civitate can adopt or dismiss the accusations. No Civitates may be censured for his behaviour except by means of the procedure defined below.

    Procedure:
    Once an accusation has been brought forwards either by one of the aforementioned bodies or by another member and has been subsequently adopted by the Consilium de Civitate the civitates is notified by PM. A civitate who is under accusation can opt either to defend themselves or request a champion to defend them, Champions must be a Civitate and would normally be the Civitate's patron. If the Patron declines, is not available or does not exist, the Civitate may agree with someone else to be their Champion.

    The Civitate/Champion has 3 days to prepare their case. On the 4th day the Consilium de Civitate opens a thread in the Quaestio Perpetua in which to hear the case. The Consilium de Civitate then appoints one of its members as prosecutor for the case, and the prosecutor and the champion/defendant debate the case in the appropriate thread for 7 days. No other member can post in this thread. When the 7 days are up the Consilium de Civitate close the thread and decide on a punishment. This choice is confirmed by a simple majority vote for or against the chosen punishment. The acting prosecutor will not take part in the vote.

    After the case is debated the Consilium de Civitate can decide one of the following:
    Dismissal of the case
    Warning, the Civitates will automatically be suspended from the Civitate rank for 1 month if he receives a Warning within the next 3 months.
    Suspension of Civitates rank for up to 1 month

    Appeal:
    Consilium de Civitate decisions may only be appealed to the general Curia if more than 2 members of the Consilium de Civitate voted against it. If an appeal is made a thread is opened by the Consilium de Civitate in the Curia Vote and all Civitates can vote on the judgement with the following options:
    Judgement remains unaltered
    Judgement is increased by one level
    Judgement is reduced by one level


    Action of Ostrakon:
    Initiation:
    No Civitates' rank shall be involuntarily removed except through the process of Ostrakon.
    If a Civitate holds three unexpired warnings they are immediately subject to these proceedings. Charges will be brought by the Curator on behalf of staff. Any civitate can bring charges of Ostrakon by sending a PM to the Consilium de Civitate.

    Procedure:
    Once an accusation has been brought forwards, the Consilium de Civitate will notify the accused Civitates by PM. A civitate who is under accusation can opt either to defend themselves or request a champion to defend them, Champions must be a Civitate and would normally be the Civitate's patron. If the Patron declines, is not available or does not exist, the Civitate may agree with someone else to be their Champion. The Consilium de Civitate will appoint the Curator or Civitates who brought the accusation as prosecutor for the case. This task cannot be delegated.

    The Civitate/Champion has 3 days to prepare their case. On the 4th day the Consilium de Civitate opens a thread in the Quaestio Perpetua in which to hear the case. The prosecutor and the champion/defendant debate the case in the appropriate thread for 7 days. No other member can post in this thread. When the 7 days are up, the prosecutor announces the demanded penalty. The Consilium de Civitate close the thread and open a poll in the Curia Vote subforum stating the name of the accused and prosecutor, the penalty demanded and options to absolve or condemn the accused. The poll will remain open for 7 days. Conviction requires a 2/3 majority.

    Review:
    Once proceedings are concluded the Counsilium de Civitate will review the process. Frivolous use of the Ostrakon is grounds to initiate Censure.


    Incidentally i tend to agree with all of these changes.

    The biggest ones i could spot at first glance were that first:

    1. the prosecutor in a case of Ostrakon must be either the Curator or the accuser. At present they may either be the Accuser or a CdeC member
    2. Accusation requesting Ostrakon must be heard in full, they cannot be dismissed initialy by the CdeC.
    3. Ostrakon cases are always voted on by the full Curia in the Curia votes subforum
    Last edited by Spiff; June 08, 2006 at 10:38 AM.
    Under the patronage of Tacticalwithdrawal | Patron of Agraes

  6. #6
    Fabolous's Avatar Power breeds Arrogance
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Gainesville, Florida
    Posts
    7,699

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    Quote Originally Posted by Spiff
    1. the prosecutor in a case of Ostrakon must be either the Curator or the accuser. At present they may either be the Accuser or a CdeC member
    I don't see any need for that change. If the accuser has not the time, it doesn't make sense to force Mim to do it, especially because the Curator might not think that the action taken was unbecoming.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spiff
    2. Accusation requesting Ostrakon must be heard in full, they cannot be dismissed initialy by the CdeC.
    ?
    Thats not a good rule at all. So now anyone who just say "Ostrakon him for talking funny" gets a full case? What a waste of time...

    Quote Originally Posted by Spiff
    3. Ostrakon cases are always voted on by the full Curia in the Curia votes subforum
    Which is fine because it will happen that way most of the time anyways.



    You know, I think the biggest problem here is that it forces people to decide at the start whether they are requesting an Ostrakon or Censure. That is supposed to be the choice of the CDC after hearing the case. Now we might have to fail something that is censure worthy because they ask for a ostrakon because they don't know how serious an offense is.
    tBP knows how to handle a sword. -Last Crusader

    Under the Honorable Patronage of Belisarius
    Formerly Under the Patronage of Simetrical
    Proud Patron of Lusted, Rome AC, Solid, and Dirty Peasant

  7. #7
    Spiff's Avatar That's Ffips backwards
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    6,436

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    Quote Originally Posted by Fab
    ?
    Thats not a good rule at all. So now anyone who just say "Ostrakon him for talking funny" gets a full case? What a waste of time...
    Well it does still say "Frivolous use of the Ostrakon is grounds to initiate Censure.", so if anyone did ostrakon for saying someone talked funny, the accused would simply not bother defending himself, the curia would vote to dismiss, then the person who started it would be censured.

    The CdeC still has choice when dealing with censure, they can vote to either suspend for a month, warn, dismiss, etc
    Under the patronage of Tacticalwithdrawal | Patron of Agraes

  8. #8
    Fabolous's Avatar Power breeds Arrogance
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Gainesville, Florida
    Posts
    7,699

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    Quote Originally Posted by Spiff
    Well it does still say "Frivolous use of the Ostrakon is grounds to initiate Censure.", so if anyone did ostrakon for saying someone talked funny, the accused would simply not bother defending himself, the curia would vote to dismiss, then the person who started it would be censured.
    Still a waste of time for no reason.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spiff
    The CdeC still has choice when dealing with censure, they can vote to either suspend for a month, warn, dismiss, etc
    However, we could not bump a case up to an Ostrakon if it was worthy of one but the accuser did not know that. Nor could we bump an Ostrakon case down if it was only censure worthy.
    tBP knows how to handle a sword. -Last Crusader

    Under the Honorable Patronage of Belisarius
    Formerly Under the Patronage of Simetrical
    Proud Patron of Lusted, Rome AC, Solid, and Dirty Peasant

  9. #9
    Spiff's Avatar That's Ffips backwards
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    6,436

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    Quote Originally Posted by Fabolous
    Still a waste of time for no reason.
    Its not really wasting anyones time, all we'd have to do is vote dismiss in the same way as we do right now, just after a bit of a longer delay, same as the old system really


    Quote Originally Posted by Fabolous
    However, we could not bump a case up to an Ostrakon if it was worthy of one but the accuser did not know that. Nor could we bump an Ostrakon case down if it was only censure worthy.
    Thats a good point though.. the CdeC when dealing with Censure should have the opportunity to propose retrial under Ostrakon proceding

    After the case is debated the Consilium de Civitate can decide one of the following:
    Dismissal of the case
    Warning, the Civitates will automatically be suspended from the Civitate rank for 1 month if he receives a Warning within the next 3 months.
    Suspension of Civitates rank for up to 1 month
    Re-trial under Action of Ostrakon

    Similarly when dealing with Ostrakon the Curia should have the option to delegate the case to the CdeC who will then treat it as Censure? Not a bad idea i think.
    Under the patronage of Tacticalwithdrawal | Patron of Agraes

  10. #10
    Garbarsardar's Avatar Et Slot i et slot
    Patrician Tribune Citizen Magistrate Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    20,615

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    Quote Originally Posted by Spiff
    1. the prosecutor in a case of Ostrakon must be either the Curator or the accuser. At present they may either be the Accuser or a CdeC member
    2. Accusation requesting Ostrakon must be heard in full, they cannot be dismissed initialy by the CdeC.
    3. Ostrakon cases are always voted on by the full Curia in the Curia votes subforum

    About 3:
    Quote Originally Posted by Syntagma
    * Delegation of the Case to the CURIA with the question of demotion.


    In the case of a demotion, a thread will be opened in the Curia where the appointed prosecutor will make the case for the Council and the Civitates or his representative will answer. Each side has the right of calling nomimating up to 5 witnesses in support. The case will last for 7 days after which Curia can vote on the folowing optons:

    * Dismissal of the accusation
    * Demotion
    For 1 and 2, I would like to hear some justification on the necessity of those changes.

  11. #11
    Spiff's Avatar That's Ffips backwards
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    6,436

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    Quote Originally Posted by Garbarsardar
    About 3:
    the problem with the third point i made was that currently the CdeC have the right to dismiss every action requesting Ostrakon without ever hearing a full trial. This aims to ammend that but has created the issues Fab raised

    EDIT:

    no wait youre right, i must have been high when i wrote point three, its already the case assuming the CdeC adopt the case (point two) and hasnt changed..
    Last edited by Spiff; June 08, 2006 at 10:29 AM.
    Under the patronage of Tacticalwithdrawal | Patron of Agraes

  12. #12
    Tom Paine's Avatar Mr Common Sense
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Silver Spring, Maryland (inside the Beltway)
    Posts
    33,698

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    For 1, it makes life simpler. I'd rather force the accuser to preosecute; why would they be unwilling to if they have put the case to the CdeC?
    For 2, ostrakon is a harsh punishment and raises strong emotions. It is only called in the event of the most serious crimes. I don't think we can accept any crime that serious not being heard, and it will also help avoid any possibility of frivolous abuse. Of curse it also means the staff can't pull another April Fools' with Ostraka involved, because we have no way to withdraw one it seems...

  13. #13
    Garbarsardar's Avatar Et Slot i et slot
    Patrician Tribune Citizen Magistrate Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    20,615

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    Quote Originally Posted by the Grim Squeaker
    For 1, it makes life simpler. I'd rather force the accuser to preosecute; why would they be unwilling to if they have put the case to the CdeC?
    For 2, ostrakon is a harsh punishment and raises strong emotions. It is only called in the event of the most serious crimes. I don't think we can accept any crime that serious not being heard, and it will also help avoid any possibility of frivolous abuse. Of curse it also means the staff can't pull another April Fools' with Ostraka involved, because we have no way to withdraw one it seems...
    You sold me on both. I am not sure that you sold me for the right reasons though (especially for the second)...

  14. #14
    Spiff's Avatar That's Ffips backwards
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    6,436

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    Well the play devils advocate, the accuser may not wish to be the prosecutor either because

    a) they wish to remain unknown
    b) they feel they lack the required skills to do their case justice

    Should it then be the job of the Curator? Or should the CdeC simply find a willing Civitate?
    Under the patronage of Tacticalwithdrawal | Patron of Agraes

  15. #15
    Tom Paine's Avatar Mr Common Sense
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Silver Spring, Maryland (inside the Beltway)
    Posts
    33,698

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    Quote Originally Posted by Spiff
    Well the play devils advocate, the accuser may not wish to be the prosecutor either because

    a) they wish to remain unknown
    b) they feel they lack the required skills to do their case justice

    Should it then be the job of the Curator? Or should the CdeC simply find a willing Civitate?
    The accuser can always find someone else to act as an accuser. Maybe we should give the accuser the right to nominate a champion as the defender has that selfsame right... But an accuser has no right to remain anonymous, if anything the accused has the rigbht to know the identity of their accuser.

    Garb, I try. Now to sell Spiff's idea to him :laughing:

  16. #16
    Spiff's Avatar That's Ffips backwards
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    6,436

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    I think people have the right to remain annoymous if they desire, for fear of vendettas or grudges when they thought they were simply doing the right thing
    Under the patronage of Tacticalwithdrawal | Patron of Agraes

  17. #17
    Tom Paine's Avatar Mr Common Sense
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Silver Spring, Maryland (inside the Beltway)
    Posts
    33,698

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    Quote Originally Posted by Spiff
    I think people have the right to remain annoymous if they desire, for fear of vendettas or grudges when they thought they were simply doing the right thing
    On the contrary. Such a vendetta or grudge can be brought before the CdeC and convicted as bad practice... personally, I would want any sort of grudge to be bringable before the CdeC if it became apparent in the actions and words of posters...

  18. #18
    Spiff's Avatar That's Ffips backwards
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    6,436

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    True, it should be an offence, but why go to that effort of making it a listed offense when we have the potential of eliminating it in many cases by allowing the accuser the right to remain unknown from the outset.. i see no harm in cases revolving around anoymous tip offs and whistle blowing
    Under the patronage of Tacticalwithdrawal | Patron of Agraes

  19. #19
    Tom Paine's Avatar Mr Common Sense
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Silver Spring, Maryland (inside the Beltway)
    Posts
    33,698

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    No way. Why? What other than vendettas is the justification? In some cases a motive may be shown to be political, say, of the accuser to discredit their opponent with false info... etc. No way.

  20. #20
    Spiff's Avatar That's Ffips backwards
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    6,436

    Default Re: Civitates Behaviour Act reform

    Hmm fine.. the identity of the accuser would always be revealed at some point anyway im sure.

    Anyway, any ideas on the second half of post number.. 9, i think, in this thread?
    Under the patronage of Tacticalwithdrawal | Patron of Agraes

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •