Proposal: Changes to PF Judicial System

Talk about any old rubbish here - but don't spam!
User avatar
Alex
Pegasus Fleet CO
Pegasus Fleet CO
Posts: 638
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 1:04 am
Location: Indiana, US
Contact:

Proposal: Changes to PF Judicial System

Post by Alex » Fri Nov 11, 2016 4:31 am

The PFA has been considering a change to our JAG process to remove the JAG position. Instead, cases would be reviewed by a tribunal consisting of randomly selected commanding officers. COs with a conflict of interest will be excluded from this random selection process. As this would be considered a responsibility of the CO, participation in reviewing cases would be mandatory. Exceptions will be made if the CO is unable to attend due to prior committments, but simply not wanting to serve would not be considered a sufficient reason to be excluded. Historically cases in Pegasus Fleet have been very rare, so it is not expected that there will be many cases that will require a tribunal.

This was brought up for discussion at last month's monthly meeting. I've brought it here for further discussion. At this time this is just a proposal.
Fleet Admiral Emily Quinn
Commanding Officer
11th 'Pegasus' Fleet

Fleet Captain Liarra Von
Commanding Officer
Starbase 332

User avatar
Joe_Rhimer
Master Chief Petty Officer
Master Chief Petty Officer
Posts: 334
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:52 am
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Contact:

Re: Proposal: Changes to PF Judicial System

Post by Joe_Rhimer » Sun Nov 13, 2016 6:18 pm

I like this setup. Not only does it get more interest in the interfleet workings, but it also allows players to interact with one another and really get all of us working together. It also allows the COs to be more involved with the final say and makes it less "mysterious admiralty decision!". I dig it a lot.
Image
Image

NoxRaven
Crewman Recruit
Crewman Recruit
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2016 6:39 pm

Re: Proposal: Changes to PF Judicial System

Post by NoxRaven » Sun Nov 13, 2016 9:34 pm

With all due respect, I think this would be a very bad idea. In most cases, JAG is not just there for purposes of hearing cases due to offenses caused by players. JAG is also there to act as a checks and balances system against the Joint Fleet Command/Admiralty. It is there to protect both the players and the upper command from itself. It is a bi-partisan, neutral entity that seeks to protect the Fleet as a whole against violations or wrongful procedures that go against the Fleet Law and Constitution. They have the power to declare an amendment to the constitution as unconstitutional should such a situation ever arise. To do away with this and simply go to a "tribunal" would be very inefficient and very ineffective. That would mean that every CO would have to be trained as if they were a JAG officer. Also, not every CO wants that type of authority or type of position.
Last edited by NoxRaven on Tue Nov 15, 2016 12:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
Cmdr Genix Tolos
TFCO TF88
Commanding Officer, USS Paladin

LtCmdr Syrric
XO, USS Carpathia

User avatar
Hawkins
Crewman Recruit
Crewman Recruit
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2016 11:35 pm

Re: Proposal: Changes to PF Judicial System

Post by Hawkins » Mon Nov 14, 2016 12:58 am

Counter argument.

I see and understand the reasoning behind removing JAG all together in a since and forcing the final judgement to the hands of the COs. It gives the authority of the final judgement to the COs. But as stated above, this would also cause issues down the road. Not all CO's are up to date on the Rules and Regulations. Additionally, yes, the JAG are held to be those to keep checks and balances to the grouping.

SO here is what is to be suggested to allow for both ideas to be incorporated.

Positions -
JAG Director
JAG Assistant Director

Description: During no active cases, He/she maintain and uphold rules, regulations, and policies of PF. Keep all records of all past and present cases and rulings. Once a case is brought forth, Member may request any fleet member/CO to represent him/herself. If the case is not an open and shut case which is covered by prior cases and a tribunal is required, randomly selected commanding officers with no conflict of interest will be selected to be witnesses and give their opinions to the JAG overseeing the tribunal. From there, the JAG and selected COs will converse and come to a final judgement. Afterwards, the JAG will announce the judgement. All Administrative members would be required to follow and uphold the final call from JAG.

Anyone with new information is brought forth, or the ruling is deemed unfair for any reason, the member in question may counter the clam with their reasoning and laws that have not been bet. Clams must be additionally signed by a TFCO in agreement. The JAG counterpart will review the case and ruling by themselves. If they come out with the same results, the judgement stands and must be respected by all parties and Administration. (Note, this last part is just thinking out loud to allow a second view of the case.)
Last edited by Hawkins on Tue Nov 15, 2016 4:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
___________________________________________________

Paul

aka

Captain David Hawkins
Commanding Officer
U.S.S. Gladiator-A

http://www.uss-gladiator.pegasusfleet.n ... main/index

User avatar
Joe_Rhimer
Master Chief Petty Officer
Master Chief Petty Officer
Posts: 334
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:52 am
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Contact:

Re: Proposal: Changes to PF Judicial System

Post by Joe_Rhimer » Mon Nov 14, 2016 1:54 am

I'm having a hard time writing up my response because there's honestly an argument for both systems. We want the COs to feel like we're not just lording over them and to let them make decisions and have a say in how things work around the fleet. It's no good if we (the Admirals) are just running roughshod through everything. This isn't The Admiral's fleet, it's OUR fleet. The CO's fleet, the Player's fleet. After all, we're all COs and Players at the end of the day.

This is also a really rough format of the system that we want to employ, opened up for CO discussion. I think what the spirit of the post is is to think of ways this could work, tweaks that need to be made to work, etc. If there's no merit to it, or if there's no possible way you guys see this working, then we'll scrap the discussion and find a new JAG officer (our previous one went MIA). I'm really certain that this is a very solid idea, and with some tweaks and expansions, we can make it work and make it work well, and keep you guys even more in the loop.

If it's just not something you want to have to be prepared for, then that's fine. We'll figure something else out :)
Image
Image

User avatar
Stannes
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Posts: 123
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2016 4:26 pm
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Contact:

Re: Proposal: Changes to PF Judicial System

Post by Stannes » Mon Nov 14, 2016 1:57 am

Please also remember that instead of like most fleets, our rules and regulations are voted for by the COs. So nothing is passed without majority vote anyhow.
ImageImage

Terris
Junior Lieutenant
Junior Lieutenant
Posts: 550
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 2:45 am
Location: Somewhere out there, beneith the pale moon light.

Re: Proposal: Changes to PF Judicial System

Post by Terris » Mon Nov 14, 2016 11:40 pm

I agree with what NoxRaven said. We need someone to be a checks and balance. Someone to make sure that everything is being done within reason, whether its removing a character, issuing strikes which I know that the latter can be monitored through the Chain of Command but still. I don't think that getting rid of a department would solve anything.
“Your job is to keep holding on, even when you think you can’t”--Captain Janeway

User avatar
Stannes
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Posts: 123
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2016 4:26 pm
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Contact:

Re: Proposal: Changes to PF Judicial System

Post by Stannes » Mon Nov 14, 2016 11:43 pm

No one has manned JAG in over a year. Are you sure that it's even a valid position still? PG went poof so long ago that we aren't even sure when.
ImageImage

Terris
Junior Lieutenant
Junior Lieutenant
Posts: 550
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 2:45 am
Location: Somewhere out there, beneith the pale moon light.

Re: Proposal: Changes to PF Judicial System

Post by Terris » Mon Nov 14, 2016 11:46 pm

well then shouldn't her character been removed and the position opened up? Food for thought.
“Your job is to keep holding on, even when you think you can’t”--Captain Janeway

User avatar
Joe_Rhimer
Master Chief Petty Officer
Master Chief Petty Officer
Posts: 334
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:52 am
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Contact:

Re: Proposal: Changes to PF Judicial System

Post by Joe_Rhimer » Mon Nov 14, 2016 11:50 pm

The character was removed and we began reviewing the point of the position when we realized that she'd vanished and we hadn't even felt a loss. Ask questions, don't make assumptions, please. You know what assuming does.

On to your original points:
First of all, we no longer do strikes, we handle things with demerits that are much less harsh, but still allow us to manage the fleet and keep things clean as possible with active ships. Second of all, we're allowing our COs DIRECT control over the checks and balances in this case, allowing them to be more active in the fleet and have an even stronger say by doing it this way. The JAG office has been completely inactive for (literally) years now, so I fail to see the point in keeping the office, really. Can you tell me how you'd make JAG a more valid thing on a day to day basis? Because we're failing to see the point of the position as it's not a PFA spot and has no vote to ensure impartiality. You might want to read up again on the Constitution and Policies so you've got a clearer concept of how we're trying to run things. Right now, I feel like our responses so far have (reasonably so) all been geared toward traditional fleet management, not the way we're trying to structure things here.
Image
Image

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”