[Suggestion] Lawyer

+1 for the reason that hell yeah that would be good for the falsley accused!

 

Ehhhh, there are a few problems with this working out.


While first of all, it sounds pretty awesome from my standpoint
It couldn't work all that well for a few small reasons...


Most of all, there is nothing a lawyer can do that the staff team can't do.

Basically, there is no way a lawyer is gonna get evidence to prove someone is innocent if the staff says otherwise.

So that leaves us with other options. The staff team isn't gonna unban you just because you have "reasons". Aka, your a good person, you've got money, you've invited friends, ect ect. The staff team doesn't really care about that. The case is black and white you did something wrong, the lawyer can't prove anything otherwise, and they won't unban you because your a good person.

While it would be nice to hire a lawyer to help me out, it kind of defeats the point.

 

This is a neat idea, and we considered it long time ago, mainly because our Player Base was small at the time, and the entire idea was plausible. However, due to the huge Player Base we have today, it just wouldn't be possible. With that said, Technically speaking, you can have a Lawyer, just not on official terms. You can have someone help you write a Ban Appeal, and give you advice on what to say - As long as it's filed under you're account.

We believe here on EcoCityCraft of self justification, you own up to you're actions, and you must submit a Ban Appeal. Money shouldn't by you out of reading over the rules you're self. A Lawyer type system would be more directed to a Role-Playing server, then an Economy server. We never really have focused on Role-Playing - At least not officially. That's why as I said above, you can kind of invent a custom way of doing this if you wish, have someone by you're side when/if you ever get Banned for support - However, I don't see this becoming an Official system here on EcoCityCraft.

 

+1 I love the idea!

 

I've thought about this and that it would be pretty cool. However my final conclusion was that it just wouldn't work on ECC.

 

That actually sounds interesting but as Jetscat said, The player base is too large.

 

Hello,

I'm a criminal justice major and plan to be a Lawyer when I'm finally through with everything college has to offer. The issue with this is a few things: 1) Generally the only 'innocent people' are the ones who weren't on their account at the time. We the staff don't tend to ban people unless we thoroughly consider all other options and all the facts.

I'm not going to lie there have been a few legit cases of 'innocents getting banned.' I myself was once wrongfully banned, but, all I had to do was tell them the facts plain and simple and they concluded I was a casualty of misreading LogBlock and a badly written grief report.

The fact of the matter is because we require such high proof there is generally little to no room for error and if they player can't find the screenshots of their innocence then a lawyer certainly won't be able to in a system like ours.

I cannot stress enough the importance of screenshotting your deals. Not just to stop scammers but to stop people who may try to get you falsely banned. Please remember that you are your best advocate, not a lawyer, when it comes to ECC. We give the accused plenty of chances to prove innocence and they just need to be prepared for it.

Revanrose6

 

-1

 

Yes, however, if you don't speak english very well and the moderators (who have dealt with many cases of hard to read appeals) cannot read what you wish to say then I find it doubtful that a 'lawyer' could do a better job.

 

Well, if it were for the primary use of language difficulty, then we wouldn't be using the term "lawyer".

It would be "translator" or something.

 

You've got a great idea as a starting point. Some people can better understand cases and more eloquently state relevant facts than other people, and so are better suited for negotiation and appeal.

The issue I have is the focus on criminal justice. Criminal justice in ECC is handled through evidence collected by Moderators+, Investigators, and witnesses and then adjudicated by SuperModerators+. Only those groups should be involved in violations of the rules.

Where there is room in ECC for third-party representation (Lawyers) would be in Civil justice. In ECC, that's almost entirely Business Law. A lot of the cases that complaints are filed for involve a breach of contract. In the real world, folks are rarely banned (imprisoned) for a breach of contract unless they fail to meet the terms of the Court's judgement to make whole the Claimant.

Knowing all this, I'd like to make a new suggestion.

There should be a Lawyer rank for Mayors+ to apply for which would grant them access to a Lawyers+ Board for these Civil Cases. This would mean that the Complaints and Ban Appeals Board would be reserved only for Complaints of a user breaking the Server Rules or appealing their ban. A "Scamming" complaint would not be accepted until it's been found that the user being complained of has been found guilty by a SuperModerator+ in a case on the Lawyer+ board and has failed to meet the terms of the judgement.

Why is that helpful?
This limits the number of complaints for Moderators+ to review, and SuperModerators+ to handle, and ensures that proper evidence is being collected and reviewed by a user familiar with the Server Rules, useful kinds of evidence, and how to properly present these cases. This helps prevent a lot of breach of contract cases which were never well documented in the first place from reaching the complaints board, by requiring experienced representation.

The logistics of how it works are pretty simple.

MayorA advertises that he's renting his melon sword out for 6k/hr.
ResidentB pm's him that he's interested.
They meet and do the transactions. MayorA takes lots of screenshots, ResidentB does not.
After the agreed hour is up. MayorA pm's ResidentB to get the sword back, and finds he's now offline. Screenshots.
MayorA is a Lawyer, and posts the evidence in a thread on the Lawyer Forum. ResidentB is necessarily informed by MayorA's Lawyer (in this case himself) by forum msg and by mail in game to have a Lawyer post on his behalf within 3 days.
ResidentB comes online and sees the notices. He sees LawyerC in Trade Chat posting Lawyer consultation for $500, 10% of damages for successful claims, and $2k for successful defense.
ResidentB pm's LawyerC, and agrees to the terms of the representation.
LawyerC reviews the case, finds out that ResidentB took no screenshots and still has the sword, and advises ResidentB to return the sword and take screenshots of the return.
ResidentB does so with MayorA, who does not drop the case, instead edits it to seek 12k in damages of a day's loss.
LawyerC advises ResidentB to settle, and offer 6k.
ResidentB agrees, and LawyerC posts this settlement offer.
MayorA must decide between accepting the settlement or asking for a judgement on his ask for damages.

Resolution:
If MayorA accepts, it's a successful claim and defense. ResidentB pays 6k to MayorA and 2k to LawyerC.
If MayorA asks for Judgment, a SuperModerator+ can set damages anywhere from $0 to $12k.

• If Judgement is $0, failed claim and MayorA would pay nothing to his Lawyer if he had on and that was a contingency of their representation agreement.
• If Judgement is $0-$6k, successful defense and ResidentB pays $X terms to MayorA and $2000 to LawyerC.
• If Judgement is >$6k, failed defense and ResidentB need only pay $X terms to MayorA

This means that Experienced Users can work through many cases without the need for Staff intervention. When Staff is needed to make a judgement, all available evidence would already be collected by the Lawyers. This has also kept a lot of angst and confusion off the Complaints board by pairing an inexperienced ResidentB up with LawyerC to figure out how best to handle the case.

By making the proper list of questions as a form for Plaintiffs and Defendants to include retainer agreements, evidence, claims and damages, and counterclaims; the whole process of making agreements in game becomes a whole lot more professional and documented and hopefully reduces scamming by creating a process to let agreements that are not necessarily staff endorsed (like donations for eco$, tool rentals, loans, etc.) become more user driven instead of being policed by an already busy staff. If cases ever make it to the Court (Lawyers+ board), they'll only ever need staff intervention when called for (objections or calls for judgment to be rendered)

Since it makes contracts more user driven instead of staff managed, then it also makes more complex contracts like corporations possible to those Lawyers who have a knowledge of how to write contracts to achieve more complex goals.

Just my two cents anyway....

To Revan: Isn't Business Law fun? I think so at least (if it's not incredibly apparent).

 

More like 2 million cents...


You gave me a whole new view of this idea. Assuming we use your terms...

I mean, take a look at the current system of complaints and things. So far it works out really nicely. Most people would agree there's no need for change. Tons of work/official stuff could be avoided and something much simple could be used, such as, just ResidentB look over the rules, or have StaffmemberD help him out.

There are myriad other problems and most (if not all) of them could be avoided by just going with the system the way it is. While I agree it would be awesome to be a lawyer (I'd have the first app in ) it just seems like a lot of work the staff probably isn't going to go to. They would have to do lawyer apps ect, it might just turn out for more work for them in the long run.

Who's to know if they should file an official complaint or a lawyer complaint? How in the world would you have apps that would get you good lawyers? They could just google and rulebook every question. How would you know someone was a lawyer in-game? Why not make it a donation feature? Why not keep things the way they are? Ect ect, I'd love for it to happen, but unless a few more people agree with me, it seems like a lost cause.

 

Hello,

Business law has never been my forte but, this could be exciting . Lets be serious staff can't do much in the way of 'settling' a scamming complaint or a breach except to ban the player and most people don't want to be banned. From what you are describing it sounds like a mediator which is generally used when a company/person doesn't want a case to actually hit a courtroom. I personally feel this could have a positive effect, but, I fear some players may not want a 3rd party non staff in their business. I do agree that this could be interesting. I feel that of we were to do this the applicants would have to prove a solid understanding of the rules and realize that some of the rules broken aren't always black and white because of staff discretion. I will think about and comment more when I'm not on a phone.

-Revan

 

I totally agree with you, but my main concern is actually and truly finding people who'll be a good lawyer.

Sure, I know I'd be perfect for the spot, but that doesn't get me anywhere near it.

 

That's true. The Lawyer function would mostly be mediation, and in the case of calling for a staff decision it would be arbitration. Failure to meet the terms of the mediation or arbitration would be what brings the case to a bannable offense.

 

In the case of finding good lawyers, I would say we would have players submit an application and staff would debate who would do a good job. The issue is that the staff would still need to keep a close eye on it because the fact is a lawyer would need to be bound my some level of standards ie: if you know he's giving bad advice on purpose you can move to hav him 'debarred'

 

Sort of like a "Bar Association"