[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Jury (was Re: Two GR concepts for dicussion)

On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 11:30:28PM -0400, Philippe Cloutier wrote:
> >Hey, why not? A third idea: instead of having delegates or a committee
> >or whatever to decide amongst disputes, how about randomly selecting a
> >jury from DDs and having their word (on who's right, on what punishment
> >is plausible) be absolutely final, with no appeal, ever?
> I don't like it at first read, but you may provide examples of 
> situations where such a procedure could be useful. In particular, just 
> determining "who's right" doesn't help much. As for determining what 
> punishments are plausible, isn't this better done by a committee 
> specialized in the Constitution?

Randomly selected juries avoid the "cabal" problem -- it's transparent
who gets involved, it's not limited to some people, it's not
the same people all the time, and it's a bit easier to deal with
(perceived/claimed/whatever) conflicts of interest.

I dunno, it's just something I've been wondering about for a little
while now.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: