Third Party Arbitration

[Ulrika Zugzwang]

I would like to enter into third-party arbitration with the city to resolve our conflicts. I feel we should identify an individual or group of individuals who will facilitate a negotiation that will end in a mutually beneficial agreement. Given that we are the two most politically sophisticated groups in all of the virtual world, it only make sense that we should employ similarly sophisticated methodology to come to some sort of an agreement.

I read in the forums that this offer is a sign of weakness. I would suggest instead that I've come to the realization that this is not a zero-sum conflict. That is we both stand to gain more through negotiation then we would in opposition.

What say you? Shall we settle this in a fashion befitting the two greatest political organizations the virtual world has known? I say yes.

~Ulrika~

[Dianne]

[quote="Ulrika Zugzwang":1b9n5jb3]I would like to enter into third-party arbitration with the city to resolve our conflicts. I feel we should identify an individual or group of individuals who will [b:1b9n5jb3]facilitate a negotiation that will end in a mutually beneficial agreement. [/b:1b9n5jb3] ...[/quote:1b9n5jb3]

I am not speaking in any official capacity here, but I think what you mean is mediation not arbitration. Although arbitration's can be binding or non binding, they are usually the former. Even if non-binding, an arbitration is the election of a third party or third party group to [b:1b9n5jb3]decide[/b:1b9n5jb3] an issue one way or the other after being presented with the facts and arguments of both parties.

[i:1b9n5jb3]"Facilitating a negotiation"[/i:1b9n5jb3] that might end in a [i:1b9n5jb3]"mutually beneficial agreement"[/i:1b9n5jb3] between the disputing parties is really more a mediation than an arbitration as it seems by that statement that you are not willing to give the power to actually decide to the arbitrator or arbitration group. You seem to want a third party to facilitate the negotiation, but you don't seem to want to be faced with any decisions that you personally don't agree with at the end of the day.

Irrespective of that, (and not speaking for anyone but myself here), I personally would not enter into arbitration (or mediation), with someone unless I believed that they could be trusted to keep any agreement that was reached.

The fact that you recently came into the sim and purposely deleted a huge build of mine (the city walls and towers) after previously maintaining you would not do such a thing, doesn't lend itself to the conclusion that you are someone that keeps agreements IMO. At the very least it's not exactly a foundation to build trust upon.

If the City does decide to enter into third party negotiations with you, I of course will participate in any manner that it is my duty to do so, or in any function that I am asked. I will also participate to the best of my ability without bias and in good faith.

My personal feeling however is that it's not something that would be productive.

[Ulrika Zugzwang]

You are absolutely correct. I want [i:ygy4ldm9]mediation[/i:ygy4ldm9] and not arbitration. I would like someone to facilitate a mutual agreement.

In regards to questioning whether or not you can trust me, let me state that you are an individual who [url=http://forums.secondlife.com/showpost.p ... 8:ygy4ldm9]pirated[/url:ygy4ldm9] a structure of mine with the consent of Sudane. [i:ygy4ldm9]Now hold on[/i:ygy4ldm9]. Let's not start an argument here or start editing posts. I just wanted to point out that there have been mistakes made on [i:ygy4ldm9]both[/i:ygy4ldm9] sides of the fence. We are all human. We both made our points.

So, let's simply find a third party we can all trust and ask them to help us reach a mutually satisfactory agreement. We don't have to set any rules or state any conditions right now. We just have to agree to mediation. It's a positive first step. Let's do it for the sake of both our reputations and projects.

~Ulrika~

[Dianne]

Well you are right that it's not appropriate (and somewhat against the forum guidelines), to engage in a personal "to and fro" over these issues. The forum is not a place for personal disputes. You will be happy to see in the forum guidelines however that we actually [i:b6kzmc8d]don't[/i:b6kzmc8d] edit or delete posts. This forum in fact has a great deal [i:b6kzmc8d]more[/i:b6kzmc8d] freedom of speech than the LL one, not less.

I guess I would agree that if [i:b6kzmc8d]I[/i:b6kzmc8d] believed, that [i:b6kzmc8d]you[/i:b6kzmc8d] believed, that I pirated your work that the your deletion of the city walls was an understandable (albeit vindictive) response, but I don't really believe that. The "pirating" situation were not only never resolved, I was never even able to present the facts or "my side" of the argument and you never enquired as to what it was.

If instead of the long series of public personal attacks on my character you had bothered to ask for an explanation, or had initially come to myself or the city and just asked about it, things would have been very different of course.

It really is difficult however to talk about any of this without it getting into more personal territory than is really appropriate for this forum. I find your debating style has a way of personalising and skewing the issues that makes "flame-wars" almost unavoidable.

In any event, I feel I have said all I can say in regards the topic of your thread (arbitration/mediation) and that these other issues are just going to lead us off of that topic so I will bow out of the thread at this point. I had nothing to do with the last round of talks with you and no idea what was said so I really have nothing useful to add here.

Good luck in seeking your mediation.

[Ulrika Zugzwang]

I absolutely agree with you that here and now is not the place or time to discuss these issues. Instead, I would suggest that we halt the mutual character assassination and simply agree to mediation.

We've shown the world how bad we can be. Let's show them now how good we can be.

I'll let you all think about it for a while.

~Ulrika~

[kevn]

If the city is seeking a new name, theme etc, what would be the point of negotiating?

[Ulrika Zugzwang]

Well, there's still the month of unpaid I work I put into the city from 2 May 2005 to the 4 Jun 2005 which certainly must be causing some folks concern as a financial and image liability. I would think this is something that the group would not want hanging over its head. I have similar concerns. So, I really think that third party mediation could help us settle these contested issues once and for all before they resurface, which regardless of our project names, is almost certain.

Beyond that I would also like to pursue something more sophisticated than forum brawling to set an example for conflict resolution in SL.

~Ulrika~

[kevn]

If you have a contract for doing work for the city, with the amount stated, I'm sure you will be paid promptly. Out of curiosity, what exactly was the contract for? Does the city own something you contracted to make?

As you know, if you were working for the city while making things, the city owns the rights to those things.

[Pelanor Eldrich]

It would be nice to have some kind of dedicated non-NB SC somewhere for cases brought against the city. Just sayin'....

I think previous attempts at this have failed because of lack of binding enforcement. Held escrow could solve that sort of problem.

[Ulrika Zugzwang]

I think what most fail to understand is that I was the only active member at that time. Therefore the contract with the city was with myself because I was the city. It was only when new members joined months years later after we became profitable that my investment in the city was contested. Were it not for my effort, the sim would have quickly gone into debt (US$200/month) and folded shortly thereafter. Given that the three initial investors were repaid without contract for their total US$1000 investment, why is this work the only thing contested? As the city grows and builds upon this initial investment, your liability grows as well.

However, I don't want to discuss that here. Instead, let's agree upon third party mediation and take this all out of the forum. We'll let them handle it, diffuse the drama, and find a mutually beneficial solution. There are many who feel that this is the ethical, responsible thing to do. Don't you?

~Ulrika~

[kevn]

If you made a contract with yourself, pay yourself as you agreed.

I see no benefit to opening negotiations with you. We have nothing you made. I see nothing that you made that we are using. Anything you did make has been removed.

If you paid money to maintain the sim, it was for your benefit, to build what you were interested in. You had fun, count that as your pay.

And if you don't want to discuss it in forum, then don't.

[Diderot Mirabeau]

It has at this time become necessary to remind the parties involved in this conversation of the following item from our forum moderation guidelines:

[i:f3b65wmj]Moderators will therefore not hesitate to pass sanction on posters using the forums to cause harm or grief, which includes but is not limited to:
[..]
6.2: Abusing the forums by addressing issues that are a simple dispute between two parties. These matters should be solved by contacting directly the individuals in question and in cases where this fails to bring a resolution the matter should be brought before the SC for arbitration. [/i:f3b65wmj]

A cursory glance at the discussion seems to suggest that the perceived parties to the dispute are Ulrika Zugzwang and the government of Neualtenburg represented by the RA.

As these forums exist for other purposes than to be a sounding board for announcing disputes or making claims I have decided as a moderator to lock the thread and encourage posters to desist from making further statement on the matter in the forum and instead seek redress through the proper channels as applicable.

This decision can be made subject to review on appeal to the SC as per article 7 in the forum moderation guidelines:

[i:f3b65wmj]7.1: The decision of a moderator is subject to Neualtenburg jurisdiction and the citizen affected by the decision may therefore lodge an appeal by email or note card in world to the Dean of the Scientific Council of Neualtenburg or his/her archivist.

7.2: A non-citizen personally affected by the verdict of a moderator may lodge an appeal by email or note card in world as in the above in so far as this motion is seconded by two citizens of Neualtenburg.[/i:f3b65wmj]

[Diderot Mirabeau]

Please be aware that the decision to lock this thread is presently under appeal to the SC by Kevn Klein. It may be reopened should the SC decide to reverse the decision. Check back in the near future.