November 29, 2012 | Author: Mircea Popescu

I. The College.

I.1. Any person with reputation in good standing, an OTC-WOT rating older than six months, with ratings above 3 from respected community members and who was never excluded from the College may apply to be added to the MPEx Rota College of Judges.

I.2. The application will be posted here below, and will consist of a GPG signed document declaring the applicant's intention to participate in the MPEx Rota as a Judge, such as for instance :

I would like to be included in the MPEx Rota as a Judge.

I.3. The application will be signed with the applicant's key of record, as shown on the WOT. If the applicant means to use a different key to sign documents pertaining to his duties as Judge, he is to mention the whole fingerprint of this new key in his application.

I.4. Applications will be published as they are received.

I.5. Applications will be considered by MPEx. Accepted applications will be announced on March the 15th, June the 15th, September the 15th and December the 15th. The accepted applicants will be added to the College of Judges.

I.6. All Judges sit for terms of one year.

I.7. Judges may be expelled by a two thirds majority vote of the College.

I.8. Judges that fail to properly answer summons twice in a row are expelled by default.

II. Jurisdiction.

II.1. The Rota will hear any claims which in any way have to do with either Bitcoins or GPG signed contracts.

II.2. The Rota supersedes the jurisdiction of any other court, institution, group, organisation, corporation, reigning monarch, city fool etc.

III. The Procedure.

III.1. Any party may sue before the Rota any other party identified by its GPG signature, provided the claim against the party being sued is in excess of 100 (one hundred) Bitcoins.

III.2. The plaintiff will post a signed statement here below, indicating the defendant (by GPG fingerprint), the cause of action, the damages sought and a list of any number of Judges he would like to decide the matter.

III.3. The causes of action are : a) breach of contract, for those cases where a GPG-signed contract existed between the parties ; b) breach of fiduciary duty, for those cases where while no GPG-signed contract existed between the parties an equitable obligation does nevertheless allegedly arise for the defendant ; c) public nuisance, for those cases where while no equitable obligation arises for the defendant, the defendant nevertheless is continually acting in a manner allegedly destructive to the wider Bitcoin community.

III.4. MPEx will email the plaintiff a signed statement indicating the Bitcoin address where the plaintiff is to pay the fee. Once the fee is paid the new case will be announced by MPEx. The plaintiff is free to advertise the case in any manner he sees fit.

III.5. The fee for each party shall be 10 BTC.

III.6. Once a new case is announced, the defendant named has two weeks to respond, by posting notice here below that he intends to argue the case, and at his option naming any number of Judges he would not like to be involved in deciding the matter, with cause.

III.7. MPEx will email the defendant a signed statement indicating the Bitcoin address where the defendant is to pay the fee.

III.8. Once the fee is paid by the plaintiff, MPEx will choose one Judge from the list of the plaintiff, or else from the College if plaintiff offered no such list, and another Judge from the College excluding those where the defendant has shown reasonable cause. The two selected Judges will be emailed by MPEx, indicating the parties, the cause of action and the place of publication.

III.9. The Judges have three days to select a third, whomever they see fit, of the College, and announce this at the place of publication.

III.10. Once the third Judge has been selected the parties have three days to make their statements of the case.

III.11. Once the three days have passed, the judges have three days to enter a judgement, which shall be binding. The parties have two weeks to make good on the judgement to the letter.

III.12. If the judgement is reached with unanimity, and one party fails to make good on the judgement, the entire College is held to enter negative ratings in the WOT for the offending party, under pain of exclusion.

III.13. If the judgement is reached with 2/3 majority, and one party fails to make good on the judgement, the consenting Judges are to enter negative ratings in the WOT for the offending party, and the dissenting Judge may not rate the same positively and will have to anull his positive rating if it exists, under pain of exclusion.

III.14. If no two Judges can agree on a judgement the case is considered to have mistried. The matter may be, at MPEx's option, be put in general to the whole Rota. A judgement obtained thus is not binding on any party, but should be used as basis in future cases by the Judges.

III.15. The prevailing party will have its fee refunded. If the judgement splits the responsibility between the parties, each party shall have a proportion of the fee paid refunded accordingly.

III.16. Upon entering judgement each Judge shall receive the case pay of 3 BTC.

III.17. At the regular end of a Judge's term he shall receive the sum of 30 BTC for his services. Excluded Judges receive nothing.

III.18. These rules may be changed at any time, with two weeks' notice, except that the amount of a Judge's regular end of term pay may not be changed after a Judge's term has started, for that Judge.

IV. Evidence and Rulings

IV.1. All signed matter is acceptable as factual evidence.

IV.2. Unsigned matter may be accepted or dismissed, as the Judges see fit.

IV.3. Any dispute regarding statements which one party was required to publish but failed to do so at the proper time will be construed in favour of the other party to the largest extent reasonable.

IV.4. No party may be required by the other party to publish or release any secret or private matter. Discovery is limited to the public record.

IV.4. The Judges may not award damages in excess of what the plaintiff asked for. The Judges are to always award damages actually proved to have been incurred by the plaintiff. The Judges may award damages that reasonably can be believed to have been incurred by the plaintiff even if unproven. The Judges are not to award punitive or other fictitious damages.

IV.5. The Judges may, whether they award damages or not, issue an injunction to the defendant, to the plaintiff or to both. An injunction is an order to either do or refrain from doing something definite. While the injunctions do not have a specific enforcing mechanism attached, they should nevertheless be followed by all parties.

Category : Rota  | 29 responses.