The Clan Lord Sentinel

Please fix the % reprensentation issue on the jury. It doesnt seem right. Read this for details

Jurys need to be a minimum/maximum of 12. Only if there is 12 players on and most aren't registered to server should we get small jurys.



Also maybe a message at log in will get more people on the jury ready to serve, as id say a few players, newbies expecially dont know jack about the fact we even have a court system.



As i can prove by haveing to show someone how it all works

for more details.

Argh! Fundun, please edit your newsgroup URL . . . [Fixed.]

Heyas!



I agree small jury sizes don't get a representative sampling.



I would also add that exiles in the jury pool that have clan affiliations to either the Plaintif or the Defendant be disqualifed. It's just down right silly to have clanmembers on a jury.



Zorton

Zorton wrote:Heyas!



I agree small jury sizes don't get a representative sampling.



I would also add that exiles in the jury pool that have clan affiliations to either the Plaintif or the Defendant be disqualifed. It's just down right silly to have clanmembers on a jury.



Zorton

Clan members are not peers?

Aldernon wrote:

Zorton wrote:Heyas!



I agree small jury sizes don't get a representative sampling.



I would also add that exiles in the jury pool that have clan affiliations to either the Plaintif or the Defendant be disqualifed. It's just down right silly to have clanmembers on a jury.



Zorton

Clan members are not peers?

They're hardly an objective jury though and thats what Hangemae says he wants, for the jururs only to take into accounts the evidence presented and not any other influences.



(Wasnt there a poll on this one earlier?)

Heh i messed somin up on the poll but you get the idea



I think not allowing your own clan on the jury is a good idea. Normal juries are picked so as to be reprenstative and to hold no close allegiance to the defendant.



I think the CL system SDB and if it was RL there be an outrage



Theres no easy way to stop peoples freinds being on the jury but same clan memeber there is. Still the whole point is to at least get more then the % represnetation we do atm.



GM please step foward i you feel this idea isnt rthe right way to go

Mjollnir wrote:They're hardly an objective jury though and thats what Hangemae says he wants, for the jururs only to take into accounts the evidence presented and not any other influences.

Sounds to me like you don't trust the jurors to ignore other influences (not that I blame you).



If that is the case, why would you trust the plaintif not to de-clan (for the duration of the trial) in order to gain a jury advantage. Or they could just get someone who is clanless to try the case for them.



Plaintifs already have an advantage in that they get to choose the time of the trial (mostly), why give them more advantages?



---



Sabbit's problem was that his main goal was to disrupt PM hunts, and so the best time for him to sue was when the greatest number of PM were out of the library.



His plan was to sue "over and over and over", and so it was inevitable that he would lose a case eventually. My only surprise is that he wasn't prepared for that.



I agree that the minimum jury size should probably be a bit larger, but unless someone can come up with an easy way to restrict non-clan friends from a jury I don't see the point in restricting clanmates.

On the one hand, conflict-of-interest seems like a valid reason to be excluded from a jury. It would be nice if such jury members could exclude themselves.



On the other hand, who *doesn't* have an interest in the portals?







Taryn.

Changin tha system for an isolated sentance be kinda over reactin.



What ifn tha trial were rp#1 vs rp #2 charged with "keelin tha pet bunny rabbit." Tha pepples ennertained would most likely be in an rp clan. Why force only rw clan members ta sit through tha trial simply because Sabbit got a sentence he didn't like?





Connie

I do not really think excluding Clan members is the way to go.

I liked the idea someone had of allowing the plantiff and defendant to each dismiss a jury member. Of course there would be some risk that the dismissed member would be replaced with someone just as bad(or worse).

Baff wrote:
---



Sabbit's problem was that his main goal was to disrupt PM hunts, and so the best time for him to sue was when the greatest number of PM were out of the library.

The main point is that an effective way of getting this accomplished is needed. Sort it out.



Idea: add a moveable item to CL. Call it an anti-portal. Whenever it is moved, a random member of PM is teleported into the lava pool on KI. All PM has to do to keep from being interfered with by other players is to hide the thing, as they seem to enjoy doing.

Helpful GM has posted on csmga that he will be increasing the attempted jury size for v311. He wrote:

Helpful GM on csmga wrote:Minimum jury needed for trial: The larger of "3" and 1-in-9 players (11%+), rounded down, but no more than max-jury-size.



Maximum jury size: 12



Hence, any time there are 12 willing & able jurors online, that's how many you'll get, regardless of population.

Ann

Hence, this has been fixed, and can be moved to the closed suggestions area. *small nudge.*