ManlyBacker
Winging it
Some one like Judge Judy, ermm, I mean Judge Hopium. I can see you taking no **** from any of us.
Jury duty
- Thread starter Matabele
- Start date
-
We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
All good... I'll need time to put somethinig together... that and I'll get the rules of evidence from the Uniform Evidence Act - that provides some real good guidelines...
Dunno about me being judge. But hey it's just calling to order... the jury really decides. Problem is the amount of time needed but the person can deal with things retrospecively... but whoever is judge needs to give each person a fair go. Tell the jury what not to read if something os to be ignored. And also I think the power to edit if necessary...
But it's all just to make it fair... and so the jury doesn't have to wade through quite so much!
Dunno about me being judge. But hey it's just calling to order... the jury really decides. Problem is the amount of time needed but the person can deal with things retrospecively... but whoever is judge needs to give each person a fair go. Tell the jury what not to read if something os to be ignored. And also I think the power to edit if necessary...
But it's all just to make it fair... and so the jury doesn't have to wade through quite so much!
Whaddya think?
Rules:
1. Each argument & supporting point must be numbered & sub-headed. As in:
1. Adam & Eve
1.1 Genetics
1.2 Theological basis
Etc
2. Each argument & supporting point must not be re-explained. If any item needs to be raised repeatedly, the repetition will be assigned a new number, the statement under that will be: Refer to point (the number of the original item).
3. Each argument using information and statistics gathered from sources must be referenced: e.g.: “Religion is the opiate of the masses” Karl Marx (Urban Dictionary, under "Religion." German economist & Communist political philosopher (1818 - 1883)
4. You may reference from websites as long as the site is shown: e.g. http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/31765.html
5. If conflicting information is found on the same point, both figures will be admitted. It is up to the jury to decide which it chooses to believe.
6. If any of these rules are breached, the opposing side may appeal to the judge. The judge has the power to direct the jury to ignore the remark, request the party to remove or amend the argument, or edit or delete the item/post.
7. At the end of the debate, both parties may make a summary of their points so far, with no new points to be raised or rebuttal.
8. After this, the judge may issue directions to the jury on how to cast their vote and may, if s/he so chooses, provide their own summary of events.
9. The judge’s summary must be shown to be impartial. If either party has concerns, it will be referred to an independent person (selected by both parties) and either retained or deleted.
10. The jury has a total of 3 days to confer. If unanimous decision is made before this, it is admissible.
11. If there is no unanimous decision reached, a poll may be taken where simple majority wins.
12. The jury is to decide on a “balance of probabilities” basis.
13. The jury is not to take, insofar as possible, their own bias into account.
Rules:
1. Each argument & supporting point must be numbered & sub-headed. As in:
1. Adam & Eve
1.1 Genetics
1.2 Theological basis
Etc
2. Each argument & supporting point must not be re-explained. If any item needs to be raised repeatedly, the repetition will be assigned a new number, the statement under that will be: Refer to point (the number of the original item).
3. Each argument using information and statistics gathered from sources must be referenced: e.g.: “Religion is the opiate of the masses” Karl Marx (Urban Dictionary, under "Religion." German economist & Communist political philosopher (1818 - 1883)
4. You may reference from websites as long as the site is shown: e.g. http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/31765.html
5. If conflicting information is found on the same point, both figures will be admitted. It is up to the jury to decide which it chooses to believe.
6. If any of these rules are breached, the opposing side may appeal to the judge. The judge has the power to direct the jury to ignore the remark, request the party to remove or amend the argument, or edit or delete the item/post.
7. At the end of the debate, both parties may make a summary of their points so far, with no new points to be raised or rebuttal.
8. After this, the judge may issue directions to the jury on how to cast their vote and may, if s/he so chooses, provide their own summary of events.
9. The judge’s summary must be shown to be impartial. If either party has concerns, it will be referred to an independent person (selected by both parties) and either retained or deleted.
10. The jury has a total of 3 days to confer. If unanimous decision is made before this, it is admissible.
11. If there is no unanimous decision reached, a poll may be taken where simple majority wins.
12. The jury is to decide on a “balance of probabilities” basis.
13. The jury is not to take, insofar as possible, their own bias into account.
Thankyou!
Fluff, you were watching TV. Don't give me that crap. And before I wrote that, I cleaned up the dirt you left all over the front, took in the dry clothes & put out the wet... . All while you were in front of the TV. After I came home from a 2-hour session at the gym.
Get. Over. It.
Fluff, you were watching TV. Don't give me that crap. And before I wrote that, I cleaned up the dirt you left all over the front, took in the dry clothes & put out the wet... . All while you were in front of the TV. After I came home from a 2-hour session at the gym.
Get. Over. It.
ManlyBacker
Winging it
Point 2 gets my vote for the most important. This debate has has done more circles than Monas this year (and that is really saying something!)
Judge Hopium, bring it on.
Judge Hopium, bring it on.
Members online
- DUFFMAN
- jbay
- torana355
- Carl
- Dan
- Buughes
- Michael Williams
- Red Baron
- max
- blacktown eagle
- Under the Sticks
- Jethro
- The Royal Soup
- Cliffymagic
- SeaEagleSI1
- Highflier
- Disco
- HoldenV8
- Waz13
- joeboy
- eagleron
- EaglesDontTweet
- Eagle 1
- Ossieau
- weagle
- JenEagle
- seaeagles4life
- Nordburg
- HK_Eagle
- Hertera
- Rackets
- eadie fan
- Kalvin
- deanm
- eaglebuzz
- BenR34
- The Indian
- mave
- Rocky
- Ron E. Gibbs
- NYEagle
- Narly
- dubLEs
- Tomay
- Uk eagle
- Dee Why Eagle
- skull61
- MissKate
- Damien2812
- LeonardCohen
| Team | P | W | L | PD | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
6 | 5 | 1 | 20 | 12 |
|
6 | 4 | 2 | 53 | 10 |
|
5 | 4 | 1 | 23 | 10 |
|
6 | 4 | 2 | 48 | 8 |
|
6 | 4 | 2 | 28 | 8 |
|
5 | 3 | 2 | 14 | 8 |
|
7 | 4 | 3 | -18 | 8 |
|
6 | 3 | 2 | 21 | 7 |
|
7 | 3 | 3 | 20 | 7 |
|
7 | 3 | 4 | 31 | 6 |
|
6 | 3 | 3 | 16 | 6 |
|
5 | 2 | 3 | -15 | 6 |
|
7 | 3 | 4 | -41 | 6 |
|
6 | 2 | 4 | -5 | 4 |
|
6 | 2 | 4 | -7 | 4 |
|
6 | 1 | 5 | -102 | 4 |
|
5 | 0 | 5 | -86 | 2 |
