Proposal: Changes to PF Judicial System

Talk about any old rubbish here - but don't spam!
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 » Wed Dec 07, 2016 2:30 am

Please correct me if I'm mistaken, but the player in question represents themselves. Should they request help, they may. This is not true legal proceedings in any way. This is a hobby and the fleet is a group of peers with a loose organization for the over all maintenance and running and a collection of rules to be followed. The point of this being a 'people's fleet' is that we refuse to go to the lengths of other fleets do to ensure compliance and domination or whatever it is that that chosen fleet chooses to do. The proposal of the jury of peers and representation of the peers being at this level is because as much as possible, we want this to be a community fleet. The moment that we have to start treating this as true crimes requiring a court set up and lawyers, etc, this is no longer a hobby or fun or friendly. It's a delicate balance.
ImageImage

User avatar
Chris
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Posts: 116
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2016 12:39 am
Location: Indiana, USA

Re: Proposal: Changes to PF Judicial System

Post by Chris » Wed Dec 07, 2016 4:00 pm

OTouvelli wrote:Please correct me if I'm mistaken, but the player in question represents themselves. Should they request help, they may. This is not true legal proceedings in any way. This is a hobby and the fleet is a group of peers with a loose organization for the over all maintenance and running and a collection of rules to be followed. The point of this being a 'people's fleet' is that we refuse to go to the lengths of other fleets do to ensure compliance and domination or whatever it is that that chosen fleet chooses to do. The proposal of the jury of peers and representation of the peers being at this level is because as much as possible, we want this to be a community fleet. The moment that we have to start treating this as true crimes requiring a court set up and lawyers, etc, this is no longer a hobby or fun or friendly. It's a delicate balance.
This right here. +1
Captain Ovik
Task Force 56 Commanding Officer

Commander Caymen Greener
Commanding Officer, USS Sinnan

Discord: @Chris#6382

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 » Wed Dec 07, 2016 5:35 pm

I will respectfully have to disagree with that statement.

As with any organization, you have the bad along with the good. Unfortunately, that means that in situation there has to be a set up to deal with those bad times/situations. To turn a blind eye to that simply because you think it will make you look unfriendly or not fun is not in the best interest of the group as a whole. With all due respect probably 90% of them will never even realize or see much of JAG if any at all. Unless they specifically go out looking for it.

Now for those of you that will ask or comment about what I said that next to no one will see JAG in action does not mean that it is an un-needed function. I will point to my earlier posts in this thread about that. I get that you want everyone to have fun. I get you want everyone to feel like a community and "inclusive". However, that does not negate the reality that for situations of a for lack of a better term "legal" nature that a body must be present in order to oversee such things. Now I understand you are saying well a tribunal can do such things. Do all of the CO's know the fleet law and constitution inside and out? Do they understand the nuances of the statements in them and in the executive directives given by the PFA? No, nor really should they. That is not their place.

The office of JAG was created for such a purpose. As well as to ensure that equal and fair representation was given and allotted to both sides during the trial proceedings. Yes, I know. No one wants to deal with the harsh side of things. Everyone would rather gloss over it and be happy and fun loving. Yet to do so would be a very big mistake. I believe that the system and procedures of the office of JAG as long as it is done correctly is the best system to use.
Cmdr Genix Tolos
TFCO TF88
Commanding Officer, USS Paladin

LtCmdr Syrric
XO, USS Carpathia

User avatar
Chris
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Posts: 116
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2016 12:39 am
Location: Indiana, USA

Re: Proposal: Changes to PF Judicial System

Post by Chris » Wed Dec 07, 2016 8:51 pm

NoxRaven wrote: I get that you want everyone to have fun. I get you want everyone to feel like a community and "inclusive". However, that does not negate the reality that for situations of a for lack of a better term "legal" nature that a body must be present in order to oversee such things. Now I understand you are saying well a tribunal can do such things. Do all of the CO's know the fleet law and constitution inside and out? Do they understand the nuances of the statements in them and in the executive directives given by the PFA? No, nor really should they. That is not their place.
Does a Jury in real life know the law inside and out? No, but they come together and learn what needs to be learned for the issue at hand, and then they go about their business. The COs could do the same thing, and it could very well be their place to know some of the rules more thoroughly, or at least be prepared to dive in and learn certain pieces for an issue.
NoxRaven wrote:The office of JAG was created for such a purpose. As well as to ensure that equal and fair representation was given and allotted to both sides during the trial proceedings. Yes, I know. No one wants to deal with the harsh side of things. Everyone would rather gloss over it and be happy and fun loving. Yet to do so would be a very big mistake. I believe that the system and procedures of the office of JAG as long as it is done correctly is the best system to use.
No, it was created in real life for laws broken in the military. It would later be added to clubs to make the Trek feel more realistic, but we are a club or community and having such a legal entity is not the same as having it for a military or society.

We try to mimic Trek (Navy) as much as possible to give it that Trek feel. But we don't need everything from Trek. Where's our Diplomatic Corps that talks to other fleets and events like FallFest? Where's the Corps of Engineers that builds infrastructure for everyone like websites and such? Why do we have Star Wars and Stargate sims if we're a Trek group? JAG is there as a protection, and as a mimic to RL navy. Many voices (and other fleets) are arguing we don't need that strong militaristic/legalistic presence.
Captain Ovik
Task Force 56 Commanding Officer

Commander Caymen Greener
Commanding Officer, USS Sinnan

Discord: @Chris#6382

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 » Wed Dec 07, 2016 11:55 pm

And the further you go away from it the less feel of Star Trek you get and more of just sci-fi enthusiasts in general.
Chris wrote:We try to mimic Trek (Navy) as much as possible to give it that Trek feel. But we don't need everything from Trek. Where's our Diplomatic Corps that talks to other fleets and events like FallFest? Where's the Corps of Engineers that builds infrastructure for everyone like websites and such? Why do we have Star Wars and Stargate sims if we're a Trek group? JAG is there as a protection, and as a mimic to RL navy. Many voices (and other fleets) are arguing we don't need that strong militaristic/legalistic presence.
That is part and parcel to the whole of the Federation. Whether people like it or not. Want to admit it or not. Once you start cutting things away like that then you can no longer call yourself part of that organization or an approximation thereof. As far as the diplomatic and engineering corps as you say. I don't know. It's a good idea, however. I would say yes let's bring those in. That way you get interfleet co-operation. We already have an R&D department. If those that know coding and nova would like to join in order to help others get their sites going and looking good then I don't see a problem with it.

However, we are going astray from what the purpose of this debate is about. That is the office of JAG.
Chris wrote:Does a Jury in real life know the law inside and out? No, but they come together and learn what needs to be learned for the issue at hand, and then they go about their business. The COs could do the same thing, and it could very well be their place to know some of the rules more thoroughly, or at least be prepared to dive in and learn certain pieces for an issue.
I wasn't referring to a jury number one. So thank you for taking my words out of context and trying to twist them. I was referring in regards to representation for both sides in a case as well as the one/s presiding over said case. Those people are the ones that are supposed to know the nuances of the law. As I stated previously that is part of what the JAG office does. However to take a piece of what you stated about the whole learning thing. As I stated back in the beginning of all this. The CO's and Admiralty already have enough on their plate. They do quite a bit as far as running their own sims and the Fleet as a whole. To continually add more to their duties is a sure fire way of sending them towards burnout. Is this what we really want to do to the people that have stepped up to help keep the wheels moving?
Cmdr Genix Tolos
TFCO TF88
Commanding Officer, USS Paladin

LtCmdr Syrric
XO, USS Carpathia

Jack Mantell
Crewman Recruit
Crewman Recruit
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 11:17 am

Re: Proposal: Changes to PF Judicial System

Post by Jack Mantell » Thu Dec 08, 2016 1:36 am

Seems to me that PF's history (as mentioned by William earlier in the thread) includes one grand and glorious case, and one proffered opinion elsewise. I see no dire, desperate need to staff an office that doesn't get used.

If a JAG person is needed, then appoint one when necessary. Let them be an advocate or oversee the proceedings to ensure fairness and objectivity. Otherwise, I think a tribunal is perfectly fine. The likelihood of it happening is probably next to nill, so getting worked up over all the lack of times PF has needed a JAG officer is pretty silly.
Image

User avatar
Chris
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Posts: 116
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2016 12:39 am
Location: Indiana, USA

Re: Proposal: Changes to PF Judicial System

Post by Chris » Thu Dec 08, 2016 3:08 pm

Just to be clear, I was not taking words out of context or twisting words but just giving some alternate examples. Let's be calm, folks. We're all voicing opinions on a volunteer, hobby/entertainment club.

I'll kindly refrain from this thread until a decision is made.
Captain Ovik
Task Force 56 Commanding Officer

Commander Caymen Greener
Commanding Officer, USS Sinnan

Discord: @Chris#6382

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 » Thu Dec 08, 2016 10:49 pm

It sounds to me - reading through everything - like you're really the only one still against this, Nox. We had a few folks balk early on, but it sounds like they've mostly changed their minds or have at least agreed that this could work. (Correct me if I'm wrong everyone).

So let me address some of the concerns that have been raised: This change actually doesn't remove any of the current checks and balances that are in place in the fleet. Let me be very clear on that. This change is no in any way giving us more power as the PFA. The current JAG office does not nor will they ever have any veto power or say over things that the PFA passes. They can hear appeals from COs, but that's sort of redundant as major rules that effect you guys you have to vote on anyway, and we can't pass it without you, really. So you're already in a position of check and balance as COs. So that really is a moot point.

The JAG office is an obsolete relic pulled from the structure of the fleets that came before us. If anything, it is MORE susceptible to corruption and favoritism than a jury of peers reviewing the situation. The defendant would be able to request a different CO in the pool if they have concerns about one or more of the reps (though if they are asking to strike all five COs, it does get a little suspect... if you've got a quarter+ of the fleet pissed off at you... you're probably doing something wrong). In this situation, the COs will be presented the complaints and claims and any evidence that the players may want to present and then discuss it. All of the fleet rules are available to ALL of you, and as COs, YES! you should have at least a functional knowledge of how the fleet rules work if you're a CO. A lot of this, though, won't be letter of the law, it will be opinion reviews and perspective reviews. "Constitution says XYZ, but I don't think this applies" sort of stuff. They'd also be presented with our opinion and judgment from the initial hearing to review, so they would understand our interperitation of the rules, and they could just look up the ones pertaining to the case.

I'd like to stress again: WE ARE NOT A MILITARY ORGANIZATION NOR ANY TYPE OF BUREAUCRATIC VENTURE! We are a gaming group at our core, and we don't need to be this militaristic. The counsel of COs desired here is a much more friendly way to do things, and it's a way that will allow us - as COs - to have more influence in the fleet and enhance our community involvement. And, quite frankly, encourage better interaction between each other.

I appreciate your candor and your passion on this one, Nox, but I really do feel like you're arguing experiences you've seen elsewhere rather than listening to the plan we're trying to formulate. Try to really sit back and consider this discussion, and if you still don't like it, vote against it when we open the final plan for a vote. That's the power of being a CO here :)
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 » Fri Dec 09, 2016 12:21 am

Now allow me to retort.

I may or may not be the only one that disagrees with this. I may simply be the only one willing to stand up and actually say something. I don't know nor does that make a difference as to what I am saying.

However, let me address a point that you bring up. Yes, I agree that the CO's should have some understanding of the Fleet Constitution and Law. None of them, however, will be affluent enough in it for every possible factor that may arise. You also bring up a perfect point. You say -
Joe_Rhimer wrote:They'd also be presented with our opinion and judgment from the initial hearing to review, so they would understand our interpretation of the rules, and they could just look up the ones pertaining to the case.
As the PFA YOU SHOULD HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH JUDGEMENTS IN A JUDICIAL MATTER. This is what I'm talking about where you take on the role of judge and jury. That in many aspects does take out the checks and balances. You are an administrative role, not a judicial one. There should be no judgment from the PFA relating to any case or hearing.

I also disagree with you saying that JAG is an obsolete relic. That is so far from the truth to be laughable. For reasons in part as I stated above is one of the major areas why JAG exists. As I have said several times. I get you want to be more inclusive with the COs. That's a good thing. But this is not the way in which to do so. If you want to include them in something like this. I'd offer an alternative that sort of incorporates your "tribunal" idea. Have the JAG office...then pick say 3-4 CO's. They will serve with JAG for say 3 months. Then after that, they are released and another 3-4 are randomly chosen. This gives you the "inclusiveness" you are looking for as well as preserves the checks and balances that is needed in any organization.

My other concern that has never been answered is I asked to be shown the particulars. From what I see all you have put forward is a framework. There are no specifics. There is nothing as to how the tribunal process will be started. How will the Tribunal be selected? Who will lead the tribunal or be its "spokesperson"? How will judgement be decided? Is it by majority vote or do all of the members of the tribunal have to be in agreement?

You seemingly have no specifics or particulars. To me, it looks like it's simply saying. "Oh we thought this might work..we don't know how. We'll just toss it up into the air and see where the pieces land."

So at this moment yes I will be voting against this when it comes up.
Cmdr Genix Tolos
TFCO TF88
Commanding Officer, USS Paladin

LtCmdr Syrric
XO, USS Carpathia

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 » Fri Dec 09, 2016 1:55 am

For starters, let me start be altering some terminology: There are no judicial matters in a group like this. There are player disputes. Again, this is a gaming group, not a corporation/bureaucracy. And as PFA, yes we absolutely DO deal with gaming disputes as a part of the Chain of Command.

Issue goes along the normal CoC: Player to XO, XO to CO, CO to TFCO, TFCO to PFA via CFOps. At that point, you're at the top of the top within our group. IF after all of those people make a decision, you're still not happy, you can request an appeal to the COs Council. We've been looking for a good bot to do random number generation for us via Discord. All eligible COs (i.e. those not directly involved or in some way influenced by the situation) will be assigned a number and we will live-pick the council using the random number generator. Once they're picked, the CO or player appealing will have the option to request different COs if they feel there are any conflicts of interest there. Then the appeal is reviewed by the council and they decide. This is simply "I don't agree with the PFA's decision on the matter and want to appeal!" So it goes before a council of their peers to make sure that the opinion is that we made the right decision. If they feel (by majority vote) we did not, they have the power to overturn it. If they feel we did, then it's done.

Your version of rotating staff wouldn't really be much better than what we're proposing except that there'd be added pressure (potentially) on those COs all the time instead of just during the course of an appeal.

You keep going back to the checks and balances bit, so let me say again: At the moment, JAG provides zero (0) checks or balances against the PFA. You as COs currently provide our checks and balances. JAG in our culture and our fleet merely exists to hear appeals, which is what this CO council would do, more efficiently and with larger fleet involvement. I'd also remind you, as stated a couple of times before, what was posted initially was an idea, not the fully fleshed out concept, merely to get the ball rolling.

I hope that I have fleshed out the idea more for you so you can understand some of the details, but you really are arguing the same points over and over. A lot of these questions have already been answered :)
Image
Image

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”