Aberrant: 2011 - OpNet - 2008: Arbitration

[Warren Verona]

Quote:

Originally posted by Sylvan:
Actually, my understanding of the way that the arbritrator would work is simply to be an impartial judge of the numbers. In that case, Wakinyan's numbers would have allowed him to do whatever he wished to Carver. And that is the potential for abuse that I'm talking about. It won't be a concern immediately, but in two or three years, we're going to have a numbers imbalance in 2008 again, and the potential for abuse will exist.

Fair point. I'll explain below. However, the exp totals in the new 2008 section will keep people on more of an equal playing field. I hope.

Quote:

Also, an arbitrator isn't going to soothe all hurt feelings; there's always going to be someone picked to "lose," and that will create hard feelings with one more person added into the mix for fun. It's human nature - no one likes being told no.

This is a position for which I would happily apply. Granted, and I type the following with all honesty, I love all you guys/gals. I'm not here to watch people get become subjected to my favorite new term: 'Jack-booted Thuggery'.

People are going to get their feelings hurt, and I'm okay with that. I'm the type that doesn't mind being the dick, because the ends justifiy the means.

Frankly, if one of the players wasn't acting like a retard, an arbiter wouldn't be necessary. Granted not all arbiter issues would have that tag, but having a person there to help settle disputed, in my opinion, is a good thing. It keeps it out of the chat room where everyone just 'guns down' the person for making a bad choice because the offended player went there for the arbitration.

Quote:

I think that the arbritrator's role needs to be clearly defined before the board starts, since we've reached a point where there is a clear division of opinion on how it would work. This could certainly be a discussion for later, but I think that roles need to be clear: are they there to supervise the numbers, or can the arbitrator rule on character consent/player agreements? Just how much authority will they have?

An Arbiter's 'duty' is to settle disputes. That said it is his/her resposibility to listen to both sides of the issue, make note, and reach a fair conclusion based on rules, facts, and decency. This result can be in favor of one or the other players, or even an agreement that both are pleased with by offering up 'mutually beneficial' alternatives.

Example:

Arbiter_Dude
As your arbiter in this issue, do you agree to allow me handle your problem fairly and agree to which ever course I take as a resolution?

Carver & Waki
Yes, oh great and powerful Oz.

Arbiter_Dude
Very funny. What's the deal?

Carver & Waki
----[both sides plead thier case]----

Arbiter_Dude
After hearing both sides, since an act of this magnitude was not discussed prior during the concepual phase of the fic, the act itself should be removed and the post edited. Waki, change it please. I know you're RPing your character, but things like this should be talekd about prior to starting a fic. Not everyone sees the world through Waki's eyes. Whatever he calls it is irrelevant, legally it's rape.

OR Alternante ending.
Arbiter_Dude
After hearing both sides, Carver, you blatantly attacked Wakinyan for a verbal slight. As a result he engaged you in combat which it is now very possible you may lose. Since you initiated the attack, you have no place to argue that Waki has no place killing/maiming you, or whatever else. I never thought I'd say it, but Waki is innocent this time. In the future, watch where you're brandishinh those claws luv. I'm not here to save people from bad RP choices, just make sure others RPing choices don't infringe on thier good time. To keep is fair I'd be willing to Arbitrate the combat if you like.

End Example

So, you see? People may not always be happy with the results but it's the arbiter's duty to judge fairly.

Special note to Carver: I know in the alternate ending that's not how it went, but I had to include an angle that both characters in the wrong so it would give fair representation to the point.

[Wakinyan]

Quote:

Originally posted by Revenant:
I'm also of the opinion that the less ignorant shit you do, you have less of a need to 'cry arbiter'.

I do not think that is right. Arbiters exist IRL because two sides believe they have legitimate issues that they cannot settle on their own. It is not a matter of ignorant shit at all.

[Singularity]

Alternative dispute resolution fun fact: arbitrators exist because people one or both parties are terrified of entering a court of law due to costs or the law being against them.

[size:1]I'll be good now.

[Machina]

In my case, "mitigating circumstances" means "if the minority who is opposed to arbitration wishes to leave an interaction after arbitration is initiated", though it might mean other things. That to me is just the most obvious example of the aforementioned "mitigating circumstances".

[z-Carver]

Arbitration Poll reasoning (I hope this is where I stick this):

1 - This seems the fairest way to ensure that no "buddy systems" are set-up.

3 - Sometimes there are things that ruin a character. I would like there to be a list of reasons why it is acceptable for one person to leave. It should be for a real reason, not "I hate the decision of the arbitrator and I'm leaving."

2 - This allows for people to bring in arbitration in a situation where one person is gumming up the story.

[Singularity]

Alright, we need to start talking about mitigating circumstances. I think there are two things we need to consider:

• What exactly are mitigating circumstances? (think of it as a threshold that needs to be met and what said threshold is)
• Who determines if this threshold has been met?

[The White Rat]

I'm going to be a real hard ass when it comes to mitigating circumstances.

1)If arbitration is taking a long time and someone needs to leave for real life issues, i.e. work, illness, etc., then they can leave arbitration.

2)Leaving because you don't like how arbitration is going WILL NOT be a valid excuse. You entered into arbitration, you must finish it.

3)Other circumstances, not dependent on IC interactions, may qualify. The validity of those circumstanced will be determined by those in arbitration and the arbiter.

4)If a majority of those in arbitration agree to end arbitration, they may do so.

[David 'Dr. Troll' Smith]

Who determines if this threshold has been met?

The Arbitrator?

[Singularity]

That's one option, Troll. Another could be having the other participants decide if the threshold has been met. Or the person calling to leave the interaction/arbitration. Or everyone involved could be required to determine whether it's been met, etc etc.

[Wakinyan]

With the way the vote is turning out that we can choose a arbitor I would like to raise a few issues.

1. What if the arbitor has a character involved in the fiction.

2. What if the arbitor has a character involved with a character involed?

There is a possibilty for abuse here. That while I hope would not happen it seems to me that it is still a possibility.

[The White Rat]

I would say that the arbiter 'can't have a dog in the fight', to coin a phrase. It would have to be someone who is not involved in the current fiction.

If there is character involvement with the current arbiter, it would be best to have someone who is not involved. But if unable to find someone from the outside, then in this case, it would have to suffice.

As for who can be arbiter, I would say that someone who has the rule books, and who has dice (they may be necessary in some cases). Availability may also have to be a factor.

[Singularity]

I would also advocate the use of the White Wolf Dice Roller found on their website here so we can maintain a measure of transparency if the arbitrator decides to use dice rolls.

[Symmetry]

Once again how about we just plead with Chosen to put a Dice roller on the forum for us? I mentioned it the one time we spoke and he was not against it. We would also like the ability for the roller to keep a log.

[Magnum Opus]

Check out the Invisible Castle.

Pretty easily configured for White Wolf dice. Type a formula like 7d10.vs(7) into this roller and it tallies up successes for you. Or just leave it as-is and add them manually.

[Matt]

I have no problem whatsoever with the addition of a dice roller on the site. I don't want it to be a requirement for the 2016 OpNet forum, but I don't mind people using it.

The reason I haven't put a dice roller on the site is completely technical. I've yet to be ale to get anything set up to my liking.

[Singularity]

Judging by the poll, it appears the thread participants have the option to pick whomever they wish for the arbitrator and that thread author approval is not necessary to initiate arbitration.

However, Wakinyan and others did bring up a valid point regarding conflicts of interests and arbitrators. I felt this was something that would be avoided by everyone, but perhaps it would merit an explicit statement in the enabling document we're using here. Hence, I feel that a line within the arbitration section of the charter like this would work well to solve this issue:

Quote:

Arbitrators shall not have any in-character or any out-of-character interest in the results of the character interaction in which they arbitrate. If no other arbitrator can be agreed upon or found, the arbitrator shall review the character interaction with a detached and disinterested point of view.

It's got some legalese in it but I think it works.

[The White Rat]

Lawyers...Typical

[Singularity]

What can I say; rules are our lives.