This is intended to lay the groundwork for adding other types of judicial
cases later. Thoughts?
-Aris
---
Title: Judicial Diversification
Adoption index: 2.0
Author: Aris
Co-authors:
Amend Rule 991, "Calls for Judgement", to read in full:
Calls for Judgement (syn. Judicial Cases, CFJs) are the primary method
for the
adjudication of disputes; the types of judicial case, the procedures for
initiating them, and the valid judgements are as specified by other rules.
When a person initiates a Call for Judgement, e CAN optionally bar
one person from the case by announcement.
At any time, each CFJ is either open (default), suspended, or
assigned exactly one judgement.
The Arbitor is an office, responsible for the administration of
justice in a manner that is fair for emself, if not for the rest
of Agora.
Judge is an untracked CFJ switch with possible values of any
person or "unassigned" (default). To "assign" a CFJ to a person
is to flip that CFJ's judge to that person. To "remove" or
"recuse" a person from a being the judge of a CFJ is to flip that
CFJ's judge from that person to unassigned.
When a CFJ's judge is unassigned, the Arbitor CAN assign any
eligible player to be its judge by announcement, and SHALL do so
in a timely fashion. The players eligible to be assigned as judge
are all active players not explicitly declared ineligible by the rules.
The initiator and the person barred (if any) are ineligible.
The Arbitor SHALL assign judges over time such that all interested
players have reasonably equal opportunities to judge, and SHALL avoid
assigning players who are not interested in judging as much as possible.
If a CFJ has no judge assigned, then any player eligible to judge that
CFJ CAN assign it to emself without 3 objections.
When a CFJ is open and assigned to a judge, that judge CAN assign
a valid judgement to it by announcement, and SHALL do so in a
timely fashion after this becomes possible. The judge SHOULD
assign an appropriate judgement.
The Arbitor's weekly report includes a summary of recent judicial
case activity, including open and recently-judged cases, recent
judicial assignments, and a list of players interested in judging.
Retitle Rule 591, "Delivering Judgements", to "Inquiry Cases".
Amend Rule 591, "Inquiry Cases", to read in full:
Inquiry cases are a type of CFJ. Any person can initiate an inquiry case
by
announcement, specifying a statement to be inquired into.
The valid judgements for an inquiry case are as follows, based on
the facts and legal situation at the time the inquiry case was
initiated, not taking into account any events since that time:
* FALSE, appropriate if the statement was factually and
logically false.
* TRUE, appropriate if the statement was factually and
logically true.
* IRRELEVANT, appropriate if the veracity of the statement is
not relevant to the game or is an overly hypothetical
extrapolation of the game or its rules to conditions that don't
actually exist, or if it can be trivially determined from the
outcome of another (possibly still undecided) judicial case that
was not itself judged IRRELEVANT.
* PARADOXICAL, appropriate if the statement is logically
undecidable as a result of a paradox or or other irresolvable
logical situation. PARADOXICAL is not appropriate if IRRELEVANT
is appropriate, nor is it appropriate if the undecidability
arises from the case itself or in reference to it.
* INSUFFICIENT, appropriate if the case does not come
with supporting arguments or evidence, and the judge feels as if
an undue burden is being placed on em by the lack of arguments
and evidence. A CFJ judged as INSUFFICIENT CAN and SHOULD be
submitted again with sufficient arguments/evidence.
* DISMISS, appropriate if the case is malformed, undecidable,
if insufficient information exists to make a judgement with
reasonable effort, or if the case is otherwise not able to be
answered with another valid judgement. DISMISS is not appropriate
if PARADOXICAL is appropriate.
