Amusing idea...

What if I took my ability to fashion an argument and made it into a public service? People could supply me with evidence and background. I could then interview EU participants for further details and post an argument representing my particular client.

I would have to review case material put before me for consistency, have an attorney/client privilege document the client would have to approve, and of course detailed methodology. I would also have to charge for my services and reserve the right to reject a client if insufficient evidence were provided or if a conflict of interest were apparent (ie i already was representing a similar case, the opposition, or had done so within a set time period).

It makes me chuckle a little bit to consider this but could be a fun way to address the inevitable player dramas that come up, and a bit of an impersonal way as well -- might save some hurt egos.



At any rate its a funny idea!

 

Only according to Earth law. This is planet Calypso. The operating premise here is, since people arent actually pressing any legal charges that this is simply a fun outlet to ingame politics. Instead of having to deal with accusations of bias, hurt pride, anonymous forum accounts, and all the other not so fun negative things people do on the boards people can have the opportunity to have someone else represent their claim --- and we might actually be able to view the facts behind the accusations rather than piddle around with high school popularity contests.

Anyone could do this. But everyone wont be good at it.

Anyhow youre all missing the point. This is for fun. And if Im going to spend a few hours constructing an argument for somebody and more time defending those points maybe I should get paid for my effort. Especially if I dont particularly care one way or the other about the individual!

 

Haha well yeah. Damn this time you got to my post before I could finish the edit. :-)

 

Youre right! I would have to conduct a legal form of discovery by having private interviews with the clients witnesses. These clients would be informed I am screenshotting replies and that these replies may be used in whole or in part during the argumentative phase. I would also have to be provided other evidence exhibiting the nature of the problem and how it relates to the client, and/or the nature of the individual the client is accusing or offering a defense against. These evidence could not be in the form of second hand knowledge and/or anecdotes, but must be valid material as recognized by the Entropia Universe service. Screenshots, recordings, forum posts, etc could be used. Others might be considered, but only in the presence of accompanying evidence that is very strong.

As for motions for document requests, I dont think the virtual situation is quite serious enough to require a full legal scope with all the consequences implied, nor do I think community members in opposition would be willing to provide said documentation on request. Without true legal consequences this simply cannot be accomplished. Though willing interviews in the same manner as with friendly witnesses would be available to the opposition as well.

At any rate, the label "Attorney" is used quite loosely. This would be more of a structured, impersonal debate on the issue. Which is a far cry from the unstructured, free form arguments we currently have.

I could go even further and describe a format for presenting and arguing these cases. Established forums could have heavily moderated subsections where two debaters would square off. Material witnesses would be brought in by requesting permission from the moderator to allow that forum user to participate, that same process could be used to remove the participant, with a final removal of all participants occurring when the "trial" is over. High profile cases might garner news attention, while smaller squabbles might be lost to the court archives.

 

Burden of proof would rest on the accuser. To have the defending side also share burden of proof is no better than what we have now, where people pick their realm of greatest popularity and sympathy and preach to the choir. As for compelling evidence to damn the client, why would anyone be interested in damning their own client? As for the rest --- how is this any different than current legal systems? A case is presented. Either a case has the records behind it back up its claims or they do not. Without records there is no case. Records = screenshot, recording....

I have already said this.

I suddenlty realized that I am not being listened to. Im being argued with. This argument is a circular argument. I will withdraw.

 

Its moments like this I feel like the world lacks imagination. No worries. Its an idea that amuses me. It does not have to amuse anyone else. I was just sharing.

 

Pretty much exactly what I was driving at. This is a game folks. These arent real legal proceedings. Nothing is at stake other than the arguments at hand. By providing an official forum where the arguments can be taken and discussed in an organized manner we both give these situations an outlet for productive resolution and add a new dimension to the political aspect of the gaming platform.

Nobody is required to use the idea, but if folks want to hash it out why not see if we can make it into something that adds to the game experience rather than spoils it. Each side can hire "attorneys" to present their case and call witnesses. I figured the old west type font on my little logo would give a clue. What Im proposing is nothing short of a satirical way to resolve disputes.

 

Ahh! Therefore it doesnt exist! Tell me. What else havnt you seen? Ever seen Canada? How about Niagara Falls, or Mount Kilimanjaro? Ever seen an element in the process of radioactive decay?

I love arguments like this. What the poster is saying is "I dont like you, so I am going to say something dickish and pretend its clever."

Troll.