Well yes...but you'd have to have some rather long applications to fill out, and yeah, he'd have to be responsible on some level.
I think the application process would need to be a little more stringent than just figuring if the user is eligible. The standard that someone who's responsible for advocacy is held to is a high level of professionalism and expertise. That's also true of the Staff positions. And so like Staff Applications it would make sense for "What If?" questions to be used in the application process. Ethics and performance are the main concerns, and so it's a rank that could and should be pretty easily lost. The main function really would be to keep simple issues out of the complaints. If a complaint posted about another user breaking an agreement instead of a user breaking rules, it'd make sense for the thread to be locked with the recommendation to hire a Lawyer to help resolve the issue, instead of spending days trying to collect evidence with the only real recourse being a ban or warning. This way, Scammers are hurt in the wallet when the Lawyers can reasonably start talking damages owed to make the Claimant whole, and that can be worked through by the Lawyers, who probably have a vested interest in raising or defeating the damages owed and are actively working to find a resolution instead of passively waiting for more evidence to file in. In the end, the scammer benefits because they can pay a fee to help themselves avoid getting a ban, the victim benefits because they have a resolution to the issue that involves them getting compensated (instead of being "S.O.L." when their scammer is banned and they get nothing), and the lawyers get paid for services rendered. This is a "Win-Win-Win". You can call it ECC's "Claims Court", or "Mediation"; but in any case it helps differentiate between the bannable offenses (Criminal) and the breaches of contract (Civil). I think damages are a major part of this. The main training issues for Staff that I can think of would be that they understand that a Claim for damages had better account well for every penny asked and only award what's justified. The homework might involve watching Judge Judy.
Yes the "What If?" questions would almost have to be a must. But the income from being a lawyer might be very little. And most of the time, the staff cannot actively hunt down evidence. It's not as if I can get on your computer and get your screenshots, but yes, sometimes there are complaints where staff could go get stuff, instead of waiting. And sometimes they do go out and look at stuff.
This is a brilliant idea for a small server not a 300-600 player server where we'd have about 50 lawyers. I think the mods handling self written appeals are the best cause its more sincere and not paid for.
You calling me insincere? But seriously now, you do have a point, but the lawyers that were hired would have to fit qualifications. If they're unhelpful then they'll get demoted.
I think it could work out well, though the main "Con" I can think of for it is that it keeps new players from having control of how their complaints are handled. However, that can also be a plus, as it's forcing an experienced player to form some sort of trust relationship with newer players and explain how the rules and deals work best. I think that outweighs
As for darce's entire post; YES YES and YES! Spoiler: Application In that case, lawyer would be a mayors + rank that cost, oh idk, 25-40k? You would fill out an application with your balance containing the money (standard rank up) Then, in addition, you must answer a series of questions pertaining to the server rules. The final question before the "do you understand that staff handle applications every 1-7 days? (once a week)" thing on every application would be the following: "Do you understand that, should you give intentionally bad advice to a client, you will be demoted from lawyer back to just your other ranks, with no refund or compensation whatsoever? Do you also understand that should you be ranked down from lawyer for this reason you will be unable to re-apply to be a lawyer?" Now with this in place, you will recieve your lawyer rank should you have answered all the questions correctly and said yes to the 'do you understand' above. KEEP IN MIND THIS Spoiler: In-game name tags Though you cannot see otherworld ranks anymore, you will have an [Law] or [L] to the right of your mainworld rank. This is neccesary so that players will know you are not trolling and are actually a lawyer. Ex: I am a mayor. I succesfully apply for lawyer. My name would show, in Global chat, like this: [G][Mayor][Law][$$$]SuperGamerRob or [G][Mayor][L][$$$]SuperGamerRob Note that is me personally, as a mayor with 3 $$$'s for my donations. A brand new president with no donations named Bob would look like this: [G][President][Law]Bob Now, as a point; whether you have '[Law]' or '[L]' could be standardized (same for all) or based on name length; Ex. [G][Mayor][L][$$$]SuperGamerRob [G][President][Law]Bob In this case, names from 11+ letters would have [L], names from 8-10 letters [Law], and should andrew feel like it less than 8 would be [Lawyer] as it fits accurately the same. As for the forums... Spoiler: Lawyer Forum Lawyers will be allowed to send their clients a screenshot of the thread for their case, or if possible clients be able to view their thread and their thread only in the section (their lawyer would post it with the client's name in title which would allow them to view it? idk how it would work.) At the very least lawyers can give their clients screenshots of the thread. The accusing (planktiff) would have his lawyer (self if they are lawyer) make a case against the accused (defendant). The defendant's lawyer would then consult the defendant and make a response post in reply to the accusations. In the end, there could be a settlement or damages charged. (settlement would require no supermod while finishing the case in agreement, pursuit of damages (which would be more than the settlement, perhaps even double- see darce's example)would end up with a supermod making the final call, or upon the defendant's or planktiff's request the case could become a Jury case. See jury explaination below.) Should charged damages be pursued, it becomes a win/lose case. Settlement causes a win/win case, thus both lawyers would be paid under their conditions (clarified upon taking the case) set for should they win the case. If damages are pursued, and less than the settlement price be charged (by jury or supermod) the defendant "wins" and defending lawyer paid thusly. This means the planktiff's lawyer is paid under the conditions set for losing the case. Should more than the settlement be charged, the reverse happens- planktiff wins, defendant loses. Should the defendant agree to pay the damage charges without offering a compromise settlement, it is also a win/win. Spoiler: Jury cases Should a request be made by defendant or planktiff for a jury case, it will become a jury case (unless the opposite side opposes the idea of a jury case) Should a jury case be made, a deliberation thread will be made that is private to the jury. The jury will be made up of lawyers, total count of 5-7 people. Should there not yet be enough lawyers normal players will be allowed to be part of the jury. In any case, the jury will hear both sides of the case. Once both lawyers are finished with both their case and responses to the other's case, the jury will deliberate. They will speak in their thread for 48 hours alone. After this time they are required to take a vote (edit a poll into jury thread- options: Innocent, Guilty, other (specify final price)) The final result from the jury will be read by a head of the jury (first jury member to post is head). They post it in the case thread, and it is then carried out. For the case of a settlement, the defending lawyer will write up a contract. The planktiff and defendant will sign it. This is proof of settlement. When it is decided for a case to be a jury case, the requesting lawyer will write up a contract stating that both sides will agree to whatever the jury's decision is. This is my humongous spiel on how i think this should work.
SuperGamerRob - I agree with most everything you said, though I think Jury's might be going overboard. I think the forums should be open so everyone can see the cases, but only open to lawyers to make posts in, with the representing lawyer for a defendant posting a screenshot or link to a contract signed by the defendant to verify that they are in fact the lawyer retained for providing a defense in this Case, with perhaps a Case # being a good idea.
Open to viewing with restricted posting is something i believe impossible. Normally its you see it you can post or you see it noone can post (for locked things) or you just dont see it. Unless andrew sits and codes for all view, some post it wont work. Thusly the screenshots to the represented idea. The jury is an extra thing that is by no means neccesary for the idea of lawyers. At this point i almost want to tag andrew so he looks at this. It has to happen
Yes but, Andrew is most likely gonna go with "Works fine way it is now." And I agree with your previous post, except that jury's may be a bit extreme. And also, having lawyers charge damage costs, some regular players may be uneasy with this.
The damages would be tough, but the if the community gets behind the notion that if someone tries to scam you in ECC, you have the ability to be fairly compensated for having to deal with correcting the issue. It also tells scammers that getting caught will hurt them a whole lot more than just being forced to complete the deal and thereby avoiding a ban.
I suppose this would work. But the lawyers would need to be watched closely by staff. With powers like that it would be an important position.
Wow, I didn't thought there would be this much replies. I've lost it now, hahaha. Well it might not work out because of the large player base, but I think this could be worth a try. Like give someone a temp. lawyer rank and let him try to handle thus and see how it goes?
