board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

Eligibility of Jurors: VOTE CLOSED

Post Reply   Page 1 of 3  [ 59 posts ]
Jump to page 1 2 3 »
Do You Approve This Text in its Entirety?
Poll ended at Wed 11 May , 2005 12:09 am
I approve this text
  
100% [ 15 ]
I do not approve this text
  
0% [ 0 ]
Total votes: 15
Author Message
Jnyusa
Post subject: Eligibility of Jurors: VOTE CLOSED
Posted: Fri 06 May , 2005 2:32 pm
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
APPROVED TEXT

¶2: Eligibility of Members to Serve as Jurors

• Members become eligible to enter the Jury Pool when they have been registered members for three months and have a post count of 100 posts.

• It is the responsibility of the Mayor to keep record of join dates and notify members when they become eligible. Eligible members will also be asked if they have an interest in serving as Mediators for the Bike Racks. Entry into the Jury Pool for service as a juror or mediator is voluntary.

• The list of members who are in the Jury Pool will be posted prominently in the Jury Room in the order in which they entered the pool. When a member has served on a particular jury, the date that the Hearing ended will be posted beside their name, with Served xx/xx/xx replacing their date of entry into the pool, and their name will be moved to the bottom of the list. The mayor is responsible for maintaining these records and ensuring that the Admins update the list of eligible jury members accurately.

• The list of those members who have also agreed to serve as Mediators will be posted prominantly in the Bike Racks. Full names will be used so that PMs can be sent with ease. Dates of entry and served dates do not have to be posted for Mediators.

• A member of the Jury Pool may not be selected as a potential juror for a particular case if:
•• they are currently involved in another hearing in any capacity
•• if they have been inactive on the board for a period of three months or more
•• if they are currently under a ban, under probation for a ban, or if their posting rights have been temporarily suspended in any forum
•• if they are under the age of 18 and the hearing concerns the age-restricted forum
It is the responsibility of the Mayor to maintain a record of outstanding penalties, and the responsibility of the Administrator(s) convening a hearing to confirm the specific eligibility of the potential jurors they draw from the pool.

• Penalties that have expired do not affect a member's eligibility to be selected as juror for a particular case.

• There are no restrictions on a member's service as Mediator beyond the requirement that parties to a dispute must agree on the Mediator, and no restrictions on the number of times a member may serve as a Mediator.

Last edited by Jnyusa on Wed 11 May , 2005 12:14 pm, edited 11 times in total.

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 06 May , 2005 2:36 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
That sounds fine to me, Jn.


Top
Profile Quote
Nin
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 06 May , 2005 3:11 pm
Per aspera ad astra
Offline
 
Posts: 3388
Joined: Thu 28 Oct , 2004 6:53 am
Location: Zu Hause
 
Once they're in the pool if they're picked - can they say no? (Holidays, no time, not feeling competent for the conflict in question)

Other than that, all fine for me.

_________________

Nichts Schöneres unter der Sonne als unter der Sonne zu sein.
(Ingeborg Bachmann)


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 06 May , 2005 4:02 pm
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
Nin, yes. And I'll add that.

edit: oops, no I won't. That goes in the selection procedure. But the answer to your question is still yes, participation on a particular case is also voluntary.

Jn

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 06 May , 2005 5:57 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
Jnyusa wrote:
If yes, into the pool they go.
That was such a comical image for me. :D

I agree.


Top
Profile Quote
Eruname
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 06 May , 2005 7:15 pm
Islanded in a Stream of Stars
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 8748
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:24 pm
Location: UK
Contact: Website
 
That's fine for me as well.

_________________

Abandon this fleeting world
abandon yourself.
Then the moon and flowers
will guide you along the way.

-Ryokan

http://wanderingthroughmiddleearth.blogspot.com/


Top
Profile Quote
Holbytla
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 06 May , 2005 10:01 pm
Grumpy cuz I can be
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6642
Joined: Thu 09 Dec , 2004 3:07 am
 
Fine.
Although I dislike attaching anything to post count because of the stigma.
One hundred posts is reasonable though I guess.
A question though.
What if a poster becomes eligible, but then has very little activity for three months but is in the pool? Should there be something about maintaining eligibility?

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 06 May , 2005 10:08 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
That would probably solve itself, since jurors are asked whether they're willing to serve when the time comes. Someone who can't be reached or doesn't reply would not be put on the list for a jury.

It might be wise, though, to add a sentence saying someone who hasn't been to B77 for, say, six months should be removed from the pool.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
truehobbit
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 06 May , 2005 10:51 pm
WYSIWYG
Offline
 
Posts: 3228
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:37 pm
Location: wherever
 
Sounds ok. :)

One question: does it matter if someone has been in some sort of trouble? (Been involved in a hearing themselves etc)
Do people need a "clean slate" in order to be in the jury pool?
(Personally I'd say no - you shouldn't be mistrusted because you've broken a rule earlier.)

_________________

From our key principles:

We listen to one another, make good-faith efforts to understand one another, and we treat one another respectfully at all times.


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 May , 2005 1:50 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
Do people need a "clean slate" in order to be in the jury pool?

I don't think we should penalize people in the future for something they might have done in the past, but it's probably a good idea to include a provision like we have for admin, that you won't be asked serve on a jury if you are currrently involved in another hearing.

Jn

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
laureanna
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 May , 2005 7:57 am
Triathlete
Offline
 
Posts: 2711
Joined: Wed 26 Jan , 2005 2:08 am
Location: beachcombing
 
This is a jury of our peers, so we shouldn't insist upon perfect people. ;)

I was concerned that there is no way to tell how long since a person posted, but if you go to the member list, you can click on a name, then click on all posts made by the person, and see what the latest one is.

_________________

Well, I'm back.


Top
Profile Quote
*Alandriel*
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 May , 2005 10:58 am
*Ex-Admin of record*
Offline
 
Posts: 2372
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 10:15 am
 
3 months and minimum 100 posts as a basic requirement are fine for me

The two suggested provisions are good with me:

- not eligible if currently involved in another hearing
- not eligible if inactive for 6 months or more

But I'd like to add a 3rd:

- not eligible if under 'probation'

We'll get to that under member's rights but I'd like to propose something similar like what we have in the case of >>Grounds for Formal Complaints Against an Administrator ~~• Three warnings for the same action or omission. >>
Further along the line I'd like to propose a smiliar system for members rights & obligations, that when (under certain circumstances to be defined) a member can be warned, that member is given a probation period (to be defined) during which he/she cannot perform any voluntary functions (and possibly other implications)

_______________
Resident witchâ„¢ [ img ]
[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 May , 2005 3:36 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
laureanna wrote:
I was concerned that there is no way to tell how long since a person posted, but if you go to the member list, you can click on a name, then click on all posts made by the person, and see what the latest one is.
I was thinking that would be the next step if a potential juror didn't respond to emails or PMs, or if the mayor was pretty sure the person had not been around in a while.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 May , 2005 3:48 pm
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
I'm going to edit everyone's ideas into the first post, for ease of new people dropping into read, and to get ready for a ballot.

Btw, we don't have to wait for a juror to fail to respond to a PM. If we say one is ineligible if inactive for six months, the admin who prepares the list of potential jurors for the selection process can just check at that time whether the person has been around in the last six months.

For efficiency reason, I might suggest three months rather than six ... recalling the 'lifetime' of the internet.

But rather than see this as a punishment - being taken out of the pool - see it as a way of ensuring speedy trial for any member subjected to a hearing.

Jn

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 May , 2005 3:59 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Three months is probably better.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
truehobbit
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 May , 2005 4:44 pm
WYSIWYG
Offline
 
Posts: 3228
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:37 pm
Location: wherever
 
laureanna wrote:
I was concerned that there is no way to tell how long since a person posted, but if you go to the member list, you can click on a name, then click on all posts made by the person, and see what the latest one is.
And in the user list in the admin panel you can see the "last visited" date - whether they made a post then or no. ;)

_________________

From our key principles:

We listen to one another, make good-faith efforts to understand one another, and we treat one another respectfully at all times.


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 May , 2005 5:11 pm
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
Ah! that's very good, TH.

And I'm making note of this as something that should be added to the admin handbook.

Jn

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
*Alandriel*
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 08 May , 2005 10:36 am
*Ex-Admin of record*
Offline
 
Posts: 2372
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 10:15 am
 
Looks good to me. Don't mind shortening to 3 months from six.

_______________
Resident witchâ„¢ [ img ]
[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 08 May , 2005 1:33 pm
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
Ok - let me put this into Draft Ballot form inside this thread, and post notices to everyone.

Hm ... I'm wondering if this is smooth enough that it can go to a vote tonight along with the other item, so that people don't have to return twice in two days to vote.

Let's try it and if people object, I'll postpone the vote.

Jn

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 09 May , 2005 12:50 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
NOW VOTING

Don't forget to vote in this poll, folks.

Jn

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 1 of 3  [ 59 posts ]
Return to “Threads of Historical Interest” | Jump to page 1 2 3 »
Jump to: