CDS Discussion

Haha - our Judiciary Debate is the lead in an article in the March issue of the ABA's Journal entitled [i:20sji86w]Fantasy Life, Real Law [/i:20sji86w]which begins:

[i:20sji86w]Bethan Vale was concerned about his local court system, which had only one judge. As a member of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, he took an active role in the development of his local government in the community of Neufreistadt. Ideally, Vale believed the community's judicial branch should be modeled to resemble the U.S. Supreme Court. But its lone judge, an English barrister and fellow confederation member named Ashcroft Burhnham, favored an English common-law approach. Burnham also got to personally select the court's new appointees, and the lack of oversight didn't sit well with Vale.

Ultimately Vale prevailed. Neufreistadt rejected Burnham's court scheme - and the idea that participation be limited to lawyers.

Both men meet on a regulat basis to discuss - and often debate - the direction of Neufreistadt's legal system. Yet they have never actually seen each other in person.

That's because Neufreistadt isn't an actual town, and Vale and Burnham aren't real people. While they do exist, they do so within the realm of virtual reality, in an expansive cyberworld called Second Life.[/i:20sji86w]. . .

The article then moves on to talk abut law in Second Life.

Bethan Vale, Justice Soothsayer and Benjamin Noble are quoted in the article.

You can read the entire article at [url:20sji86w]http://www.abanet.org/journal/redesign/03flife.html[/url:20sji86w] This magazine has over 547,000 subscribing attorneys so I'm expecting to see more of them wandering about the CDS soon.

___________

[i:20sji86w]Edited to add url[/i:20sji86w]

I floated the following idea by Ashcroft, who didn’t like it. Gwynneth, OTOH thinks it’s worth a look at. TOP and Jon have expressed interest. I'm looking for lawyers and bankers to weigh in on the idea as well. I'd need at least 3 of each to make it work.

I would like to purchase a large CDS Mainland Franchulate modelled politically and thematically after Switzerland. There would be a Swiss style government and local bylaws which recycle 95% of Ashcroft’s Judiciary Act and Codes of Procedure. Jon thinks 16km2 is a good size. I'm taking a hard look at Sudane's group tools post to see how this could be made to work.

Ashcroft’s resistance stems from the fact that losers in court can appeal all decisions to the SC. Passage of the arbitration bill allows the ability to enter into agreements which may be appealed to the SC only on constitutional grounds. The franchulate could decide by direct referendum to secede if the Franchulate or Arbitration Act are repealed or if, say, the franchulate m2 or %LL rate became prohibitively expensive. The secession clause, or at a minimum a secession mechanism, would have to be agreed upon if/when the application and charter are approved by the RA.

The focus of the franchulate would be financial services and law. An advantage to remaining in the CDS is the use of the New Guild to aid in bulding/scripting/development.

I would like to move Eldrich Financial HQ there and start banking “properly”, attract SL Bank and Midas Bank, attract the World Stock Exchange as well as the members of the Law Society.

While this goes on I'll be resubmitting my existing 3 cases to the SC to see how that works out. If this is successful perhaps the Esperantists would be interested in a franchulate of their own. If not, the DPU platform includes the creation of a Commonwealth which they could be a part of.

I want to allay some fears about this. The franchulate gov't would be a direct democracy. We would uphold the CDS code and Constitution. I am *firmly* committed to the CDS. Local bylaws would mesh with the SP reforms on the Incorp. Act and the banking roadmap. I'd expect franchulate based corporations to incorporate under the CDS. I would maintain Eldrich Financial offices on the Platz and add one to the Cardo.

I think it might be a good way to do some petri dish experiments with JA, direct democracy, and the franchulate act. Please poke holes in the concept. I want to cross all the "t"s and dot all the "i"s on the application. Any feedback is greatly appreciated.

http://www.abanet.org/journal/redesign/03flife.html

Hello Pel,

I'm not sure what to think about Ash's ideas, but franch's are very interesting!

1. This deserves it's own thread
2. Don't forget to contact Beathan. He's got ambitions in this direction.

[color=blue:3abpbwgr]new: [/color:3abpbwgr]3. The stuff I mailed you when I gave up on my franch. probably includes Sudanes proposal on how to set up the group.

This article is great news. Perhaps it's time to take the judiciary discussion off the shelf and dust it off.

Btw: Top, I recommend PM for private correspondence with forum members .. and in saying so I am in breach of my own recommendations - isn't it ironic

For those of you who don't know, our very own Benjamin Noble has an interesting Virtual Worlds law blog at http://virtuallyblind.com/
Benjamin heads the Secondlife Bar Association.

There is also a forum on SL law here: http://www.talksecondlife.com/second-life-law/

I think we should get ready, don't ask me how, for an influx of US lawyers to the CDS.

I didn't mean to hijack the thread. Perhaps the esteemed moderator would like to move my franch idea to the franch thread. Thx! -Pel

How nice to see you all slowly moving towards CARE's position of a stable, professional, efficent and accountable Judiciary! A pity we couldnt have done this before we lost valuable members of our community because of a clash of personalities...

http://www.abanet.org/journal/redesign/03flife.html

Michel --

No one in the CDS has ever opposed a stable and efficient judiciary. We have just opposed an insular judiciary captured by a limited and elite sector of our citizenry. Despite CARE's specious advocacy of judicial exceptionalism and legal elitism, I think this society is too committed to democratic principles and social equality to ever follow CARE down that road.

So -- the question is how we can have an effective and stable judiciary that is both democratically accountable and inclusive. This has proven to be, and still proves to be, a sticky wicket. I have just filed proposed legislation that I think accomplishes this goal, using existing institutions and simple, easily-understood, and readily accessible format. Hopefully we can get the dispute resolution ball rolling again.

Beathan

That's all I wanted to say!

LOL