Forum:The high court idea revived

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > The high court idea revived
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 18 December 2008 by Azaz129.

i aint gonna just let this idea die, it's too good, if an user gets wrongly banned, then that will beave a record and hell knows that that can do to their nerves, and the court has nothing to do with wheather the wiki is democratic or not.

therefore, my court system includes, for evidence

WHOIS:as evidence

Anti-bias:users who are appointed jury or judge or defendeant/accuser's lawyer must remain neutral and not show any bias towards any side.

the judges will be a group of very trusted users (preferably helpers) or wikia staff

the jury are regular users, but those who are involved directly with the accused do not count, and instead are withnesses, the jury must remain neutral, and proceed by the evidnce.

the "lawyers" must use arguments in a polite manner, and only sent out objections or facts after the opposite lawyer has given evidence.

the verdict is based upon the jury's idea and/or the judge's decision, depending on what kind of trial is held.

the judge must pass a reasonable sentence. depemnding upon the seriousness of the incident

IPs are not allowed to be given a trial, only registered users who has been here a long time.

the defendant will be only allowed (by a special ban) to edit his/hers personal verdict.

please give me an idea, but please don't jump to conclusions Explorer's ring 3.pngBtzkillerv has entered the building! Cape (blue).png 13:52, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

This isn't a courthouse, decisions are made on a community concensus, not a vote or jury. An appeal ability is already in place for banned users. Sannse already said no, anyways. Central doesn't have time to get involved in an internet court. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 14:25, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Karlis, we don't need anything so formal, these matters can just be discussed on the talk page of the user in question. Administrator Hurston (T # C) 14:29, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
that's not always the case. Christine blocks people "yawn" & "IRC joke >_>)" and "like I freaking care anymore. do whatever. normal block time now, since he's NEVER DONE ANYTHING WRONG. right.", which are pathetic excuses for outlining a block, i don't want to see seasoned and well meaning editors getting indefs for a blunder they made (considering i experienced that first hand) a while ago. and i won't say that it's justified. and karlis it dosen't have to be a democracy to have a court system, they are NOT the same. if i get this turned back, there will be a lot of d'ohs for me, and likewise, users get their talk fully protected, which means they can't speak and niether can we get to them, thats why i set this up, i'm not doing this for any p0erticular user, i just want to see my idea work

Explorer's ring 3.pngBtzkillerv has entered the building! Cape (blue).png

If you feel like going against somebody from central who already told you no, that's your funeral. Banned users' talk pages don't need to be protected until their appeal is over or they deny an appeal, but we don't need a court system. I'm curious, I want to hear from you who you are defending as a ...seasoned and well meaning editor...? The policy set in place works fine, this isn't the United States Judicial System. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 15:35, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
D'oh, but i'm not american, and i never been to america, you're mistaking that i live in north america, but i dont, alright if you meant for my funeral then ill just give up, but seriously i wanted even one single small idea of mine to work, and ill be happy

Explorer's ring 3.pngBtzkillerv has entered the building! Cape (blue).png 15:51, 11 December 2008 (UTC) It wasn't to say that you live in America, but your explaination sounds much like the failure of our court system. People don't need 5 chances. You screw up, you might get a second chance. Anything after that is abuse of peoples' trust. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 15:54, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

fine, well then feel free to delete this discussion, i guess it it won't pass, it won't. ah well Explorer's ring 3.pngBtzkillerv has entered the building! Cape (blue).png 16:19, 11 December 2008 (UTC)