A discussion to create an appeals process for Ladle bans.

[compguygene]

As a Ladle Enthusiast that does not want to see our community divided over the issue of someone requesting an appeal to their Ladle Ban, I would like us to discuss, create, and vote upon a process to appeal a Ladle Ban. If nothing else, by going through this process we can at least give a legitimate place for Liz (Vogue) and her supporters to see her 12 month ban modified, or not.
I think it's in our best interest as a community to at least put the process in place and follow this logically, so that we serve out the needs of justice as fairly as possible. Let it never be said that we just punished Liz because we don't like her and refused to hear an appeal because we didn't even bother to put a process in place. We need to at least have a process in place by which we formally accept or reject an appeal, and if we accept an appeal, what to do from there.
In general, I see the process as follows:
1. A statement of the case by a Ladle Enthusiast or the Person under a Ladle Ban, that is a request for an appeal.
a. This statement would include reasons for the appeal, such reasons would be a defect in the original pm trial, new evidence to reverse the original decision, or a pardon because of evidence of reform on the part of the defendent.
2. A Ladle Enthusiast would organize an initial PM trial to vote if the appeal is to be considered or not.
a. The PM trial would follow the normal PM trial setup on the wiki which would take a week to resolve.
b. The basic idea here is that the voters in the PM trial would be voting to see if the appeal had enough merit to be heard. They would not be voting at that time on the outcome of the appeal.
3. If the PM trial decides that the appeal does not have enough merit to be heard, the appeal dies there. If the PM trial decides that the appeal does have enough merit to be heard there would be Public Discussion about the appeal, which would be limited to a week.
4. At the end of that week, a Vote would be issued, which would take another week to resolve.
5. In total, the entire process would probably take about a month to resolve.

[takburger]

If the initial request include the reasons and this is a forum, then we can guess that it will also be the defence. Unless we face a super motivated person who would make a summary as the appeal reason then a full plea later. But I don't think it is the best way either for the defendant.

However, to judge if the request is receivable is important. So I guess we could have a PM trial for the reception of the request.

[blondie]

how it should work:
an appeal, if won, gets the appellant a retrial.

the retrial is what determines the change of status.

it's two separate matters

• the appeal is essentially a judgment on the original trial. Was it conducted adequately? If voters say not, then retrial.
• the retrial deals with the same argument as the original trial

[compguygene]

My thoughts on this were a bit different than yours and more in lines with the process that is followed in most western criminal justice systems. Normally, an appellate court decides first if an appeal is worthy to be heard, then if worthy, hears the appeal and renders a decision. Sometimes, said decision may be a complete retrial. If you look at what I outlined above, it is effectively a retrial.

[takburger]

I do not agree with blondie.

An appeal, if received has the purpose to alter the previous judgement. It is based on the same legal basis as the previous one.

A retrial would be asked after one of the party provide new evidence to a case justifying it to be reopened.

[Gonzap]

just don't.. don't

[compguygene]

I do not agree with blondie.

An appeal, if received has the purpose to alter the previous judgement. It is based on the same legal basis as the previous one.

A retrial would be asked after one of the party provide new evidence to a case justifying it to be reopened.

Basically what I was saying.... agreed.

just don't.. don't

This is about creating a process for an appeal, nothing more at this time.

[blondie]

ok, then I'm confused, because compguygene's 2nd post is basically what I said.

[takburger]

ok, then I'm confused, because compguygene's 2nd post is basically what I said.

Almost, it's just precision of language here.

[blondie]

ok, then I'm confused, because compguygene's 2nd post is basically what I said.

Almost, it's just precision of language here.

ok

[compguygene]

To best serve "Precision of Language" (I hope moviegoers and book lovers catch the "The Giver" reference), here is exactly what I mean, restated more precisely.


1. A statement of the case by a Ladle Enthusiast or the Person under a Ladle Ban, that is a request for an appeal.
a. This statement would include reasons for the appeal, such reasons would be a defect in the original pm trial, new evidence to reverse the original decision, or a pardon because of evidence of reform on the part of the Person under the Ban.
2. A Ladle Enthusiast would organize an initial PM trial to vote if the appeal is to be considered or not.
a. The PM trial would follow the normal PM trial setup on the wiki which would take a week to resolve.
b. The basic idea here is that the voters in the PM trial would be voting to see if the appeal had enough merit to be heard. They would not be voting at that time on the outcome of the appeal.
3. If the PM trial decides that the appeal does not have enough merit to be heard, the appeal dies there. If the PM trial decides that the appeal does have enough merit to be heard there would be Public Discussion about the appeal, which would be limited to a week.
4. At the end of that week, a Vote would be issued, which would take another week to resolve.
a. The vote would be initiated by a Ladle Enthusiast, and would be about what to do about the appeal. What is to be determined in the vote would be guided by the Public Discussion. The idea is to allow anyone in the community to have a voice in the proceedings, although the final vote is determined by a PM trial.
5. In total, the entire process would probably take about a month to resolve.

[/dev/null]

As a general tron player, ladle is a tiny part of tron as a whole, perhaps you guys should have a subforum.

I do enjoy me a good boohoo, but the disconnect between the forums and tron as a whole is getting a bit extreme.

[Vogue]

tl;dr

compguygene tell me how i can make a serious appeal pls, we're not getting any younger here pal

[compguygene]

Give me some more time. Since blondie has not worked up a re-write of the Ladle operations page, and any appeal process is going to depend on that, I am working on one. Also, we need to vote the process in first, then we can follow it. Sorry for the needed procedural delay.

[blondie]

the content of that page isn't changing, just organization and writing.

or i guess, the ladle isn't changing, one of its wiki pages is