My Proposal for a Resident Dispute Resolution System

Ahar... thanks James. Yes, that's what I thought too -- but another thing that remains to be considered (in the far future anyway), would be an online equivalent of "celebrity murder trials" IRL, the kind that are featured in The National Enquirer and such. It may sound laughable now, but I suspect that even in a closed system, there will be leaks -- IMs, copying-and-pasting of court transcripts and sharing arond via notecard -- and that there may be trials that soon get coverage in the SL blogosphere and beyond. Especially the part involving appeals, which would stretch their tenure and make multi-part installments for "scoops" more viable like how trials IRL drag on and on. (Of course, in SL, so much goes at an accelerated pace already, so it's only "unnaturally natural".)

Very preliminary of course; I'm just tossing out ideas.

What's wrong with that? I like good gossip just as much as the next person.

In one of my more recent updates to the document, I added some stuff about requesting transcripts & information from the Lindens, via e-mail. So, anyone could do that -- no need to read about it on a blog.

Oh, of course I didn't say anything was wrong with that.

But obviously, while Lindens will provide official info, the blogs -- like their RL-court-coverage counterparts -- will show an array of diverse, and likely controversial opinions concerning decisions made and what happened and all that.

We need that too.

I'm interested in setting up a mock trial, like Torley described. My idea is, we'd write up notecards, one for each jury member, and one for each party...the parties would have to explain their case, and the jury would have to interview the people based on what they know. Interesting to see what would happen.

Also, no one gave me an answer on my proposed Article II, which would outline what information Linden Lab must give when it comes to a decision (for people that do not use a jury).

In light of what is on the top of page one in the General forum, I thought this thread could use a bump.

SL government need not be anything exotic. It should be two-tiered and simple.

Volunteers should meet with those parties involved, and try to arbitrate. Hopefully they could find a solution. If not, the volunteer referees would contact a Linden.

This way, Lindens would spend less time dealing with disputes. This is the only good reason for an SL government.

James is not proposing a government here *at all*. He is proposing an optional system of handling disputes and their resoultions that would exist *by choice* along side (read "in addition to" our current system of dealing with abuse reports, bannings, etc. No other types of issues would be delt with.

So this is the SL equivilent of the League of Nations idea that tried to happen after World War One.

For the non-history buffs out there, the League of Nations was the precursor to the United Nations. It was an opt-in dispute resolution system, where nations could come to the table with each other and try to hammer something out before another world war broke out.

The result? World War 2, the worst conflict in human history.

Why? Because if you didn't like the final decision, you can just thumb your nose and say "bye", and get zero retribution. Japan did this, and almost conquered most of the Far East as a prize.

If it's a volunteer, optional dispute system it will fall down like a house of cards.

LF

Good point Lordfly, I should clarify. The option comes with which system you choose to use. The outcome is final based on which system you choose. =)

I like this idea. And if there is ever a District Attorney position open, count me in!

DOINK DOINK!!!

-aimee