Second Life Bar Association MeetingNovember 17, 2007
Transcript
Benjamin Noble: Good morning, everybody.
Benjamin Noble: We'll start now. It's a short agenda this morning, so it should go pretty quickly.
Benjamin Noble: Thanks a lot for coming on a Saturday, again.
Benjamin Noble: Quick reminder, that we run transcripts of these on the website.
Benjamin Noble: There's really just one formal agenda item today, but before we get to that, I want to point out the referral that I sent yesterday.
Alexei Skjellerup: ((Thanks, Ben...))
Benjamin Noble: A resident is looking for help with a RL/SL crossover group that will help RL disabled users get in to and use SL.
Benjamin Noble: I got one fantastic response from one of our members who is a RL attorney with a group that does work with the disabled and she is going to talk to him.
Benjamin Noble: But if anyone else is interested in assisting, I'm sure there will be enough work for more than one person, and it looks like a great opportunity.
Benjamin Noble: Let me know if that's something you'd like to help out with by IM later on.
Jai Baxter: Ben, can I just flag for future thought -- all for this, but, has the Board given any thought to referral liability issues? I'd like to go back & eyeball it some time after this ID business is sorted.
Benjamin Noble: Jai - yes, we have to address that. I think that we'll have to run a directory only, with a big disclaimer (like Cat does for the Galileo Law Directory) but yes... we have to watch out to make sure we're not crossing any ethical lines. We try to make it clear that we can't (yet) know if people are lawyers, or where they can practice, etc. but it is an issue to watch for.
Jai Baxter: fair enough -just wanted to get a stick in the ground for later, thx
Benjamin Noble: That actually takes us to the only real agenda item, which is implementation of the voluntary credential verification system that the membership voted to create last month.
Benjamin Noble: I think that we can have a discussion, brainstorming session on this and unless it gets out of hand, we won't need to go to parliamentary procedure. :)
Jessica Holyoke: is this open floor debate or are we following Rules of Order?
Benjamin Noble: Let me put the general plan out there again, so that we all know what we're talking about. This is what was approved by vote last month, in general terms.
Benjamin Noble: The idea, essentially, is to let members associate their professional credentials with their avatar.
Benjamin Noble: 1) Someone who wants to be verified tells the SLBA Executive Board his or her real life name and real-life Bar Association number, in-world.
Benjamin Noble: 2) Two members (for cross-checking purposes) will independently call the telephone number that the state or federal bar has associated with that name and bar number (for example, you can get my phone number by searching my name at http://calbar.ca.gov -- most jurisdictions work like this, because attorneys need to keep public contact information on file with regulatory agencies).
Benjamin Noble: 3) Speaking to the member by voice at the telephone number listed via the real-life bar association site, the member(s) in charge of verification would confirm the tie between the avatar and the real-life attorney.
Benjamin Noble: 4) The real-life attorney would also execute a paper affidavit attesting to the connection between the avatar and the attorney, and stating what jurisidictions he or she is authorized to practice in. This would also state that the member will keep the SLBA updated as to any changes in status or admissions.
Benjamin Noble: That's the basics that were approved. I'll add to that that we need to charge something for the service, and I think that the majority or all of that payment can go to the members who are making the calls. It'll be a way for members -- maybe law students -- to make some Lindens, and will encourage this to actually happen -- I would guess that if it is all volunteer it just won't get done.
Lexis Looming: Is all of this to be done by the exec committee or will we set up an ad hoc committee to work on this. If so I will volunteer to help out on that committee
Benjamin Noble: Floor is totally open here. This really isn't my plan, it's come out of the members ideas, so implementation should too.
navets Potato: Why not create an online database that has all this information in it as well that is accessible in SL and on a regular webpage?
Lexis Looming: I don't care to be paid
Benjamin Noble points at Lex and applauds. I think thats the first time I've seen "volunteer" in chat here. You're appointed, as far as I'm concnerned.
Lexis Looming: lol
Henri DeCuir: Since the point of referral liability has been brought up, I recommend that we also request that verified members include a statement of their experience in whatever fields they wish to be referred clients.
Benjamin Noble: navets - I like that idea. Do you want to work with Lex? Also, Henri, can you be part of this, it can go along with overhauling the web site...
Lexis Looming: Good idea Henri
Jessica Holyoke: ok, I have at least two objections and one obstacle. The first is I don't like having the status reporting being incumbant on the resident, since we have no way of enforcing that. I don't like having unverified people making the calls, because that has a hole for a scam. And how do we maintain that the typist stays with the avatar? I know that this sounds like complaining, but overall I think its a good idea.
navets Potato: the areas of expertise can be part of the database
Jai Baxter: Hmmm statements of expertiuse are their whole own area of regulation and constraint.
Jai Baxter: Can we do the amplied stmts first, and Jessica's good points second, Ben?
Lexis Looming: I agree Jessica that the callersshould be the first to be verified
Benjamin Noble: Well, objections are okay, but we need to see them all as obstacles at this point, based on the vote.
Henri DeCuir: 'Experience in ____' would be sufficient, I believe, Jai. It would allow us to be able to say "suchandsuch has told us that he's a disability-law attorney'
Benjamin Noble: I agree with the concerns though, completely.
Benjamin Noble: I think that myself and solomon are probably as publicly tied to our avatars as it is possible to be.
Benjamin Noble: Does anyone object to us verifying anyone who is to do the verifying?
PeterS Jenkins: except I am using my real name!
Benjamin Noble: Yeah... they haven
Jai Baxter: *sigh* which topic are we on, please?
Benjamin Noble: haven't made "Duranske" available yet.
PeterS Jenkins: lol
navets Potato: I don't know about the other states, but the DC and MD bars do provide a list of their members which certainly verifies being an attorney in good standing
PeterS Jenkins: should lobby SL to allow real names for avs
Lexis Looming: My rl website has a link to my sl office and avatar
Jessica Holyoke: I haven't seen a state yet that doesn't
Jai Baxter mutters, many other countries do not, jess
Benjamin Noble: Jai - generally, we're discussing the first step - how to qualify people to do the subsequent verifiction.
Benjamin Noble: The idea that is proposed, basically, is that somehow those people be verified first, and that makes sense to me.
PeterS Jenkins: could use the phone tree system starting with you
Jai Baxter: got it thanks, Let's use Ben and Solomon and anyone else they qualify on the exec board - like a tree of PKI sigs starting at the root
navets Potato: certianly a simple enough methof
Jessica Holyoke nods "sorry I was being Ameri centric
Benjamin Noble: I'm suggesting that --- yes -- that's it. Between Peter and Jai's comments.
Benjamin Noble: Okay.
Jai Baxter: here's the thing: exec board only? I;d vote yes, for reasons I can explain if desired
navets Potato: please explain
Jai Baxter: They have responsibilities to the group - good both from a duties and protections point of view.
navets Potato: no insult to that group, but that is not much in the ways of verification
Benjamin Noble: [[Sidenote, big picture - let me propose this -- we'll talk this through this month, then move it to the forums so others can participate, and we'll come up with a formal plan there.]]
Benjamin Noble: Jai - the exec. board may not be who you are thinking of.
Benjamin Noble: That is three members, who aren't officers, elected as sort of ombudsmen under the org's bylaws.
PeterS Jenkins: ould you expand on your point navets?
Henri DeCuir: navets, I think the proposal on the table is that Ben would conduct the verifications of the other board members identities, and those that he could verify would help him make the calls.
Lexis Looming: Its easy enough that we just have the callers verified by two members and then differnt members verify those who did the verification of the callers
navets Potato: basically what Benjamin said, they've made representations, but how do we know they ar who they say they are from a verification point of view
Benjamin Noble: I have to jump in on this - the bylaws are pretty explict that nobody but the President and President Elect *have* to be associated with real IDs.
navets Potato: I like Lexis' idea
Henri DeCuir nods at Ben.
Jai Baxter: Yes so not all Exec Bd members need do this -
Jai Baxter: - but -
Jessica Holyoke softly golf claps
Jai Baxter: - Broadly, to my eye, (1) you want it being done by fiduciaries, for the group's sake ... and (2) the doers want the protection of being nominated to act officially for the group, for their own sake ... and (3) in some general liability schemes it is more likely that the protections of (2) will be given some effect if the duties of (1) are in place.
PeterS Jenkins: yikes!
Alexei Skjellerup: Wow...
PeterS Jenkins: who talk like that?
PeterS Jenkins: talks
Jessica Holyoke: you'ld be surprised
Jai Baxter: Tut, tut, we're lawyers - at least by courteous assumption :)
Lexis Looming: The problem is there really is no fiduciary law in sl
Benjamin Noble smiles.
Benjamin Noble: That actually makes sense.
navets Potato: by the time we're done there will be fiduciary law in SL
Lexis Looming: Let's hope
Jai Baxter: no, Lex, but when y'all get sued for wrongful referral or advertising viols, you WILL find some law somewhere that alleged to apply :)
PeterS Jenkins: thats a big assumption
PeterS Jenkins: for me this would all be pro bono work - if theres a financial risk its not worth it franly
Henri DeCuir: Since that's been thrown out there, now, allow me to point to a decent summary of referral liability for those behind: http://www.abanet.org/legalservices/lris/clearinghouse/liable.pdf
Benjamin Noble: The idea basically, is what we were discussing earlier, from a practical perspective? That Solomon and I, who we'll just have to agree are who we say we are (but were associated with avatars in mainstream press before this came up) can verify the rest of the board, to the extent they want to be, and then any of us can verify volunteers.
navets Potato: why not use the bar associations websites to do intial verification of some of us and then use those folks to verify the rest
Jai Baxter: .. and just as in international trade - where we have to interpolate between uncertain laws - here in SL we can assume that the GENERAL principales are most likely to be roughly followed, for now
Jai Baxter: oh heck, you can go verify each other in 3 minutes
Jai Baxter: heh
Benjamin Noble: Thanks, Henri. I think that all we can do is offer a directory with a lot of disclaimers. Somebody -- Lex, maybe? -- should take a close look at this.
PeterS Jenkins: can we clear this in advance with the State Bar of California?
Jessica Holyoke: Getting back to the original goal, it was for the SLBA to be able to more directly refer business without doing the general notices like we've been doing now
PeterS Jenkins: get an advance ruling or something?
Benjamin Noble: I have talked to their ethics line people about it, but let's do that formally.
Jai Baxter: oo man
Jessica Holyoke: or at least how I view what the end goal is
Julynn Lilliehook: Excuse me if I am behind the power
curve...but I thought verification was to give legitimacy to the group in that
legal professionals are in charge..not some 12 yearold in
PeterS Jenkins: great idea - rather than going on about fiduciary law and all that which is a grey area
Jai Baxter: Ben. Sorry. Start down that road and you will never find a turnoff, I fear
Solomon Cortes: One comment: I'm happy with the proposed system, provided that it's understood that Ben and I and any others doing the proposed initial verification will only be expected to take reasonable steps to confirm that the team of credentiallers are who they say they are. I would not be happy having some kind of responsibility for monitoring or 'policing' their work. In other words, the verification standard we'd apply to begin with would be the same as we use all the way through: namely taking good faith steps to check that an individual who has volunteered to be a credentialler is the person and has the qualifications they claim. But not more than that..
Henri DeCuir: Well said.
Lexis Looming: Ben I think your idea is excellent that you two start withthe Board. then the Board can verify callers then some of the callers can verify you for everyone else's comfort
Julynn Lilliehook: Please...do not contact the WIsconsin Bar!!! The last thing I need is those dumbasses on my back!
Benjamin Noble: Julynn, that's maybe a side benefit, but
we're only requiring that the president and president elect be verified. I have
no expectation that it goes beyond that. The biggest benefit of this to the
organization is that it keeps us from sending referral requests to your 12 year
old in
Jessica Holyoke laughs with Julynn, "no that wasn't what verification was for"
PeterS Jenkins: remember this is on the record please
Jai Baxter: Yes. What Julynn said. You;re crusin for a brusin. In which juris do we then cherrypick to get informal opinions? Heh. (I agree with King Solomon there, also, on the caveat.)
Julynn Lilliehook: If the SLBA involves the state bar association, I'm gone.
Benjamin Noble nods. Worth remembering, especially when we are in informal discussions.
Lexis Looming: The verification statment should only factually state what was confirned and draw no other conclusions
Benjamin Noble: Don't worry, Julynn, the only real intereaction is via the website, where a verifying member will check phone numbers.
PeterS Jenkins: how else would we do it but contact the bar assoc?
Julynn Lilliehook: Can we not form our ouwn ethics code?
Benjamin Noble: I agree with all of the other thread here. E.g. making it clear what steps were taken.
navets Potato: no we can't as we are bound by the ethics codes of our bar associations
Julynn Lilliehook: Everything I do here will be with the caeat that this is not legal advice...
Julynn Lilliehook: *caveat
navets Potato: uh, we make all clients that come from SL to sign our regular retainer agreement
Benjamin Noble: From a very general perspective, now's not a bad time to remind members here and reading this that you do have to comply with all of your local ethics guidelines in SL. Including confidentiality, conflicts, etc. That's trickier than it sounds at first.
navets Potato: so no caveats
Julynn Lilliehook: well, I wouldn't
Julynn Lilliehook: My loacl ethics ppl have no idea what SL is and that's just the way I like it.
Benjamin Noble: I'm happy to discuss that with anyone later. It's a little off topic.
PeterS Jenkins: they will now ....
Julynn Lilliehook: I know what I can and cannot do in RL and won;t do it here.
Henri DeCuir: Julynn, again, this is on the record and perhaps inappropriate for discussion here.
Julynn Lilliehook: Conflict of interest and all.
Jai Baxter: :) for the record. The early
offering-of-securities-on-web-sites issues almost KILLED internet brokerage
actvitity, and jailed people, in the mid 1990, by bad opinions of
Julynn Lilliehook resents the attempts by Mr. DeCuir to censor the record.
Alexei Skjellerup: And please include a disclaimer in the SLBA referal service...
Benjamin Noble: Everyone just has to make sure that they are complying with all applicable ethics codes. In a sense, think of this like any other communications medium. Jai is right - a lot of lawyers got in trouble with websites in the late 90s too. It's critical that people stay in compliance with their local ethics rules.
PeterS Jenkins: beyond being licensed in a juris, do you haveto be physically present there to giveadvice about the law of that juris?
navets Potato: of course not
PeterS Jenkins: good
Julynn Lilliehook: my thooughts exactly
Lexis Looming: No peter I am licensed in three states but only live in one
PeterS Jenkins: but you can get on a plane?
PeterS Jenkins: just kidding
Benjamin Noble taps a gavel on the podium lightly. Can we talk about cost a bit?
Jessica Holyoke: well, isn't talking about cost a bit premature if we don't know the methods yet?
Benjamin Noble: Maybe. Good point. What methodology questions are out there?
Jai Baxter: er - making phoen calls on VoIP and reading websites, and the time of the verifiers, and web hosting. That it?
Alexei Skjellerup: I thought Ben and Solomon would be the ones to begin the process of verifying the exec. board members, and then they all would continue verifying all the rest...
Henri DeCuir: not VoIP, real phone.
PeterS Jenkins: can everyone get on skype?
Jessica Holyoke: well, we don't really have much beyond phone calls, and maybe liability insurance. But on a side note, law link, which is like myspace for lawyers, verifies with a phone call and a bar ID
Benjamin Noble nods. Though it has to be to a real call to a landline.
Benjamin Noble: Can be from skype, but to a land line.
navets Potato: The only other method of verification would be for each of us to send in a cert of good standing, but that seems a bit over board
PeterS Jenkins: why not cellphone?
Benjamin Noble: Yeah, my bad. Cellphones are fine.
navets Potato: why differentiate from any type of phone
Henri DeCuir: We'll need to call whatever number the bar association has.
Benjamin Noble: But real phone numbers.
PeterS Jenkins: yes of course
Benjamin Noble: Right -- what's on the bar site. We can't just skype a skype user.
Julynn Lilliehook: how about a pdf copy of your bar card and mabe a motion filed with a court and signed?
Henri DeCuir: But can't do VoIP chat. That serves no verification purpose other than that the target actually has a voice.
Benjamin Noble nods.
Benjamin Noble: What Henri said.
Cat Galileo: not all lawyers file motions
PeterS Jenkins: yes what ever is on the bar site
Henri DeCuir grins at Cat.
Julynn Lilliehook: yes...I know....
Cat Galileo: trying to think of an equiv. for transactional
Julynn Lilliehook: that's true...I can be verified through the bar website
Jessica Holyoke: well, what attorney that doesn't file motions would take a referral?
Jai Baxter: :) so is there a cost to some calls beyond the reach of SkypeOut? Have to call non-weebed-up Bar Assns or national registrars, too
Jessica Holyoke: I guess some transactional ones
Benjamin Noble: A motion doesn't really makes sense, but an attorney could execute an affidavit.
Benjamin Noble: And put it on file with us.
Jai Baxter: Yes, we do exist Jessica (smile)
Julynn Lilliehook: Letterhead....
Julynn Lilliehook: DNA sample....
Benjamin Noble: We're a bit off track here.
Jai Baxter liked locally valid affidavits from the registrant's home jurisdiction - maybe each claimed admitted jurisdiction
navets Potato: I like the affidavit on letter head with a photocopy of some doc. that verifies admitance to the ar - easy
Cat Galileo: make them define quantum meruit
Jai Baxter: .. gives SLBA something to rely on
Jessica Holyoke: Its nrule of perpetuities
Jai Baxter: OK, Cat, I;m out then (smile)
Julynn Lilliehook: Perhaps we need a number of wways one could verify their credentials.
Benjamin Noble: I agree with that. One early proposal had us asking attorneys to agree to indemnify the SLBA also, which I think we should do.
Jessica Holyoke: ok, that just bombed as far as a joke goes
Julynn Lilliehook: Choose the one or two methods that apply best to you....
Benjamin Noble: I liked it. Somebody took the bar recently.
Jessica Holyoke laughs
Jai Baxter: Most, I fear. (ahem) Ben - do you expect to need phone call money, for you and Solomon to be Cerificate Authority #1 and #2 for this tree of trust?
Julynn Lilliehook: One person could have their local judge affirm their good standing
PeterS Jenkins: does the bar site have the members emails address on it - I can't recall - that would be faster and cheaper
Solomon Cortes: I'm not getting why there's a need for an affidavit. If someone says they are David Naylor from FFW and provide their eg firm switchboard number, and you then call that number, go through to the lawyer, confirm the name of their SL avatar and that they are seeking SLBA verification, and then check their local bar record to ensure that (at last update at least) they were qualified to practise, isn't that enough?
Julynn Lilliehook: the other could send an affidavit on their letterhead, etc.
Queen Coronet: Jessica, i hear RAP and groan. Nothing funny about that one. But thanks for the effort.
Philip Gloucester: Local judge won't work for me in the
Julynn Lilliehook: Wiscinsin does
Jessica Holyoke: Except, do you think a big firm lawyer is getting referrals through here or a person in private practice
Alexei Skjellerup: Same in
Julynn Lilliehook: But manny attorneys use several email addresses
Jai Baxter: sheer Q of belt and suspenders level of sheild against later clanms of insufficient diligence. Da..Solomon.
Lexis Looming:
PeterS Jenkins: just pick one
Jai Baxter: I agree it;s not *legally required* as a minimum
Benjamin Noble: I think that Solomon and I can do it ourselves, without payment, and through the board too. I'm thinking payment is necessary when we have a few general members doing this. It's better than working at a club for making a few Lindens, and it's a service that real attorneys should be happy to pay ten bucks or so for.
PeterS Jenkins: i'll check out the CA bar right now brb
Lexis Looming: Anyone practicing in federal court has to have an email for filing
Solomon Cortes: Again - why is there a need for an affidavit? Just seems overkill to me.
Julynn Lilliehook: CA probably lists whether the attorney prefers caf or half-caf coffee as well.
Benjamin Noble: All state bars require some public information -- address, phone, email, etc. When we looked into this six months ago, I think we couldn't find one that didn't have something sufficient.
Geri Kuhn smiles at Julynn
Philip Gloucester: Well as the owner of our practice I can validate myself lol
Julynn Lilliehook: What's the problem withan affidavit? We do them all the time...
Benjamin Noble: Re affidavits, I'm on the fence. I see them as nice to have as a backup, and we could give people a form to make it easy.
Julynn Lilliehook: I am a notary as well, so I guess I can notarize my own sig, right?
Benjamin Noble: But they do add a level of complexity. If a small one. I think, generally, I would be more comfortable if we had them.
Philip Gloucester: There's a reasonable cost in the
Jai Baxter: Ben ...let's see if the Gordian Knot can be sliced. Does SLBA budget allow us (or Exec Bd) to authorize you and Solomon to spend up to (some small kitty amount) to make the phone calls, if needed to supplement free verifying resources, to inmplement this plan?
Benjamin Noble: I don't believe Notaries can do their own notarization, but I don't remember.
Lexis Looming: Will they be scanned and posted?
Geri Kuhn: No they can't Ben.
navets Potato: how about making it a declaration instead as that doesn't have to be notarized
navets Potato: notaries can not
Philip Gloucester: I agree
navets Potato: notorize their own sigs
Julynn Lilliehook: WE define affidavits in the
Sarah Amat: Solomon, I suppose it depends on the extent of our certification. If we are certifying that someone is a real life attorney, we may want physical proof. If we are certifying that an avatar is simply a real life person who claims to be bar certified, then I don't think we need affidaits.
Lexis Looming: Not anywhere I know of can notaries do their own
Cat Galileo: are we requireing indemnity? (which I've heard people comment on)? that could serve the same puprpose
PeterS Jenkins: California Bar site has email, fax and phone numbers
Benjamin Noble: We do have the money, and I don't think Solomon or I care about losing a dollar or two on this to start with.
Julynn Lilliehook: I know that, navets...bad joke.
navets Potato: I think the indemnity is a good idea
Jai Baxter: declaratio -= good, esp in countries with more baroque notary/authenticator regs
Julynn Lilliehook: bar certified but not an RL attorney? Explain please...
Solomon Cortes: Julyinn - that's the problem with affidavits / notarisation: you (and your firm) shouldn't be signing off on your own docs. So it really adds a fair amount of admin and effort - which would be fine if I thought it added any greater certainty to the process: but I don't think it does. We already have lawyer name tied to firm, contact details, bar record and lawyer's own representation they are who they are: more I think is just overkill. For what it's worth, the likelihood that I would go to the effort of also filing an affidavit or getting an appliction otarised (or would have time to do so) is pretty low....
Alexei Skjellerup: "baroque notary regs"...
That's
navets Potato: [chuckle] would be nice if I could sign for the Judges too
Philip Gloucester: BTw as a trade mark attorney in the
Rykk Ferraris: US has its own separate Patent Bar as well
Cat Galileo: no doubt the licensing authority, whether or not it's named "bar," would be acceptable?
Julynn Lilliehook does not notorize her own documents in her solo practice firm.
Geri Kuhn laughs.
Benjamin Noble grins at navets.
PeterS Jenkins: yes forget the afffadavit
Alexei Skjellerup: As long as the process is explained at the disclaimer, I don't care...
Jai Baxter taps shoe politely on chair leg: Ben, would you like someone to make a motion to require non-notarized signed declarations, transmitted in electronic image form to the SLBA verifier, verifying each of the statements required by the SLBA process we have approved.
Philip Gloucester: I have no problem with sending docs just the form
navets Potato: I move for what jai said
Benjamin Noble: I think that we should let this transcript percolate in the forums for a month to give everybody a chance to weigh in, and then turn it into a motion at the next meeting....
Philip Gloucester: Seconded
Julynn Lilliehook thinks Jai may get arrested for doing
that in an airport bathroom in the
Benjamin Noble: But there is a second, so this is up for a vote, or further discussion.
PeterS Jenkins: were supposed to be attornies in SL for gods sake lets get out of the 20th century!!
Jai Baxter: well it can sit then on the table, hm?
Jai Baxter: I'd vote now, but am in no rush
Julynn Lilliehook: i.e. tapping of the shoe...
navets Potato: doing what in a bathroom at an airport??
Alexei Skjellerup sighs...
Philip Gloucester: Vote?
Jai Baxter: Jules :) it;s all in the predicate
Benjamin Noble: At the moment, there's a motion on the floor. Let me get the text:
Benjamin Noble: Navets moves to require non-notarized signed declarations, transmitted in electronic image form to the SLBA verifier, verifying each of the statements required by the SLBA process we have approved.
navets Potato: some one second please
Philip Gloucester nods
Philip Gloucester: Seconded
Benjamin Noble: It has been seconded.
Benjamin Noble: Would you accept a friendly amendment that it also include a provision indemnifying the SLBA for any resulting liability?
Alexei Skjellerup: Please...
navets Potato: deffinietly
Philip Gloucester: yep
Solomon Cortes: And it's officers and members....
Jai Baxter: mmmmm
navets Potato: usual language
Benjamin Noble nods.
Benjamin Noble: Yes, subject to working out the language in committee.
Benjamin Noble: Does someone want to call the question, or is there further debate?
Lexis Looming: Call for the question
Jai Baxter: We'd have to craft that one but in principle it;s probably OK - can;t be too greedy or jursidction specific
Benjamin Noble: Lex calls. We'll vote by voice. All in
favor say aye, all opposed say nay. Voting will close at
Lexis Looming: aye
Geri Kuhn: Aye
Wendell Holmer: aye
Julynn Lilliehook: nay
Philip Gloucester: aye
Alexei Skjellerup: Abstain...
navets Potato: Aye
Jai Baxter votes yes by tapping his shoe again ... see, Jules? Nyah :)
Jessica Holyoke: aye
PeterS Jenkins: aye
Henri DeCuir: aye
Queen Coronet: aye
Rykk Ferraris: aye
Sarah Amat: aye
Benjamin Noble: Motion carries.
Solomon Cortes: / me votes aye without using voice given what's going in the background here
Solomon Cortes: Darn, always get that '/ me' thing wrong. Oh well....
navets Potato: Any oter biz?
Geri Kuhn smiles
navets Potato: other
Benjamin Noble: Okay. I think we have a good plan here. Are there other details we need to discuss, or can we take it to the forums?
Lexis Looming laughs softly
Lincoln Beck smiles
Benjamin Noble: (forums to work out language, etc.)
Jai Baxter: well lessee - no money needed as we have genreous officers ...
Philip Gloucester: uhuh
Jai Baxter: declaration sorted ..
Alexei Skjellerup: Just like to remind, Ms. Prokofy Neva not being here, that a discleimer must be drafted...
PeterS Jenkins: use email
Jai Baxter: .. did we agree to Ben and Sol as tree root?
Jai Baxter: .. did we agree to only exec comm members?
navets Potato: sure
Benjamin Noble: We'll start with those, Jai.
Jessica Holyoke: dont say her name
Alexei Skjellerup: I'm sorry, but...
Jai Baxter: do you want a motion on those?
Jessica Holyoke pokes alexei
Benjamin Noble: Re: cost, we may want to add one when we get out of e-board.
Benjamin Noble: But I'll leave that to Lex and the committee to talk about if that works. It's a bit down the road.
Benjamin Noble: I don't think we have to have a motion for the rest of it, Jai. That's all included in the proposal that was voted on in a sense, it's just the "how" part.
Jai Baxter: Ben, feel free to strike this if already covered: but I move that the verification be carried out by SLBA exec board members, and that each verifier first is verified by Benjamin or Solomon, who will verify each other.
navets Potato: Thanks all, got to run - ttyl
Jai Baxter: I do not think those bits *were* in the voted plan
PeterS Jenkins: ciao
Benjamin Noble: Let's make it formal then. Is there a second?
Philip Gloucester: Seconded
Solomon Cortes: I don't agree
Alexei Skjellerup: I thought those bits were included...
Jai Baxter: About, Oh King?
Jessica Holyoke: opposed
Sarah Amat: Just to clarify: will Benjamin and Solomon only verify the exec board members?
Lexis Looming: call for the question lets just make sure they were
Solomon Cortes: That the exec board does all the verification - unless of course the exec board is willing to do it.
Jai Baxter: Object to ther cll, I want to hear Solomon
Benjamin Noble nods. Let's get this clarified.
Jessica Holyoke: actually, may I speak on this one?
Julynn Lilliehook: yeh, what's with "unless"
Benjamin Noble: Sure, Jessica.
Philip Gloucester thinks the exec board better verify each other first
Solomon Cortes: We have 170ish members, and - what - five or six people on the exec. That's a lot of work, potentially, even if not everyone in the list is looking to get verified.
Benjamin Noble: Anybody can, really. I do want to make sure we're clear what we're doing.
Henri DeCuir: Those who get verified could then be recruited to do verifications.
Benjamin Noble nods. Yeah, I do not envision the exec. board doing all of this.
Jai Baxter: :) expande the Exec Bd then or create an explicit delegation that makes the worker bees safer :)
Julynn Lilliehook: yes...just like Amway
Jessica Holyoke: I'm only remaining sitting because I'm not sure I can sit back down if I get up. While it might be beneficial to some to have an SLBA be filled with lawyers who have all verified, the expanse and opportunity regarding SL doesn't allow for everyone to verify
Jai Baxter: Amway heh heh
Solomon Cortes: I suggest we verify the people who want to be the credentiallers: when we have worked out process and what the payment for credentiallers (if any) will be.
Benjamin Noble: I envision us verifying each other, then yes, we get people who want to do it -- that's where the cost comes in -- to do the rest who want to.
Lexis Looming: I understand that Ben and Solomon will verify the Board whow ill verify the callers
Alexei Skjellerup: Is there really so many people interested?...
Jessica Holyoke: I myself would not verify for some fairly commonly known reasons
Benjamin Noble: I suspect that people will do it if there's a fee and they get paid for it.
Julynn Lilliehook: I'll take a portion of the process.
Jessica Holyoke: the only two people who have to verify as of right now is Ben and Solomon.
Sarah Amat: Right. The exec board could verify the law students or whomever is doing the actual verification of the attorneys.
Jessica Holyoke: so that's a process of whether the exec board should be doing it
Jai Baxter: Jess, my applogies, I do not thikn all E B members need to do this - just that those whodo the work perhapos shoul be selected from persons (like the E B) in official positions
Geri Kuhn: I'm sorry, I have to catch a plane...will catch the transcript online, but happy to help verify.
Henri DeCuir: Fly safe, Geri.
Solomon Cortes: That's fine by me. Apologies if I misunderstood - had thought we were proposing that the exec board do all the credentialling. If that's not the case, I have no objection to what was proposed.
Geri Kuhn: Thanks bye
Benjamin Noble nods. Thanks for coming, Geri. Have a good flight.
Philip Gloucester waves goodbye to Geri
PeterS Jenkins: bye
Benjamin Noble: I agree with Solomon here. Based on that clarification, I'm fine with it.
Jessica Holyoke: the other point is, with an SL organization, that is potentially world wide, how do you define the boards fiduciary duties anyway in context to what is now an SL group? I don't believe that just saying that the exec board has duties generates the obligation
Cat Galileo: I'm on E-board, & willing to help verify, but -- I don't qualify for full verification myself since not practicing
Jai Baxter shudders - a lot - at the "use nonmember alleged law students" idea. Why not just recruiter SL campers at a nightclub? "Diligence defense", hmn?
Cat Galileo: can certainly verify my ID tho
Jessica Holyoke: Cat, you can give your real name and actually meet Ben
Benjamin Noble: Have to be members, have to be verified themselves.
Jessica Holyoke: depending on your commute
Jai Baxter: Cat if you are who you say you are you can be verified enuf for this, I would think
Henri DeCuir: Ben is several states away from Cat.
Henri DeCuir: Though the three of us can probably work out some verification through our alma mater.
Jessica Holyoke: I'm on the East coast, several states can mean a two hour drive
Julynn Lilliehook: I have no problem revealing my identity....
Cat Galileo: i thought we were verifying that people were practicing attys qualified to take referrals - but then I was late to the meeting and missed the last 2 so maybe I'm wrong :)
Jessica Holyoke: Cat: the issue is who's doing the verifying of the attorneys
Philip Gloucester: navets and I have met and can verify each other's RL identities
Benjamin Noble: Some will, some won't, and that's fine. Cat - you could verify that you are who you say you are, but that you aren't practicing. Frankly, I'm not practicing right now. :)
Jessica Holyoke: if you have unverified peopel making the verifications, there's a leap there
Cat Galileo: fine
Jai Baxter: Look, Jess has a very valid point which is important to me. We are not "outing" anyone's RL here as a condition of having their help. But we do have to constraint *verifiers* that way.
Benjamin Noble: Jessica - I think fundamental here is that only people who are themselves verified are going to be able to verify others.
Jai Baxter: ben, maybe you and Solomon bring a verified-recruiting plan to next meeting?
Philip Gloucester: Agree, Banjamin
Benjamin Noble: 100% agreed re not outing people -- that's why it is so critical that this be entirely voluntary.
Jessica Holyoke: That is the point I was making I believe Ben
Philip Gloucester: *Benjamin
Jai Baxter: if you thikn there's not enough EB membes who will be able to man it
Lexis Looming: I agree with Ben and excec members who don't want to or can't be verified should b excluded
Julynn Lilliehook: I would be willing to head a verification committee
Jessica Holyoke: oh I was just referring to being on the E-board and not verifying is all from my position and the position of future e-board memebers
Benjamin Noble: I think we'll be fine through the first level, and then we can gauge the interest.
Lexis Looming: Julynn has the job
Cat Galileo: I dont see a reason to expand past E-board members at first - maybe there will be 15 people who want verification and then a trickle of new members -- if it's 170 that would be different
Julynn Lilliehook gulps
Henri DeCuir: nod. I don't anticipate it being an immediate floodgate.
Lexis Looming: I'll help
Cat Galileo: if there's volunteers tho i wouldn't want to turn them away!
Benjamin Noble: I suspect it'll actually be a fairly low percentage of members, but I have no real idea. Let's see how it goes.
Jai Baxter: I'm with Cat. Can we start with a small # please?
Philip Gloucester: What is the advantage of being verified exactly?
Rykk Ferraris: OK, I have to run. I'll catch up in the forums
Julynn Lilliehook: I could do 50 in a day if I had to...I don't go to the office...I'm in the office..I don;t commute...
Jessica Holyoke: Philip: having referrals directed to you instead of in a group notice
Alexei Skjellerup: After all this fuss, I expect at least one person interested...
Benjamin Noble: Thanks for coming Rykk - we'll wrap up shortly and move the discussion to the forums, I suspect.
Jai Baxter: OK Changed motion. I move that the verification be carried out by those verified Benjamin or Solomon, who first will verify each other; and that we have a written plan for delegatiuon that addresses liabiity and responsibiity for any verifier not on the EB.
Philip Gloucester: ok that's good thank you
Benjamin Noble nods. Is there a second to Jai's motion?
Jai Baxter: modulo typoes :)
Lexis Looming: The verifiers can not verify the people who verified them
Jai Baxter: ..those verified BY B or S ...
Jai Baxter: yes, and accept Lex's amend
Jai Baxter: if seconded :)
Benjamin Noble: Is there a second?
Julynn Lilliehook: Canyou break that into two separate motions?
Lexis Looming: secon
Lexis Looming: d
Julynn Lilliehook: the part after the semicolon?
Jai Baxter: Julyn has asked to amend this to drop the second clause about written plan.
Jai Baxter: To keep ths moving I second hger amendment
PeterS Jenkins: i like the written plan part
Lexis Looming: accepted
Benjamin Noble: So the motion is: " verification be carried out by those verified Benjamin or Solomon, who first will verify each other"
Benjamin Noble: We'll do the second one as a separate motion per Julynn's friendly amendment.
Jai Baxter: well, be, IF you vote for her amendment we will drop the 'wroitten plan' stuff :)
Jai Baxter: fine
PeterS Jenkins: is there a "by" mssing?
Benjamin Noble: That has been seconded.
Lexis Looming: but a person can not be verifed by the ones who verified him/her
Benjamin Noble: (yes, insert a "by" where appropriate) - so here...verification be carried out by those verified by Benjamin or Solomon, who first will verify each other, but a person can not be verifed by the ones who verified him/her
Lexis Looming: can not verify the same people by whom sh/she was verified
Jai Baxter: restating - verification be carried out by those verified by Benjamin or Solomon, who first will verify each other, and no one can be verified by their own verifiers
PeterS Jenkins: cool
Jai Baxter: (Ben beat me to it, same thing)
Lexis Looming: what he said
Benjamin Noble: Jai's restatement is clearer.
Julynn Lilliehook is confused.
Alexei Skjellerup too
Benjamin Noble: I think we all know what we mean, but it isn't clear in the motion.
Sarah Amat: No one can verify the person who verified them?
Julynn Lilliehook: How would one verify their own verifYER?
PeterS Jenkins: should be no one else but Ben or Sol
Benjamin Noble: Can somebody take another shot at it -- what are we trying to say with the last part?
Jessica Holyoke: no conspiracies?
PeterS Jenkins: no mutual back scratching
Jai Baxter: well Lex was concerned about reciprocal fraud
Lexis Looming: Exactly
PeterS Jenkins: like references for grant money lol!
Benjamin Noble: No one will be going back and verifying anyone twice. Once someone was verified, they would have no need to be re-verified by someone who verified them.
Jai Baxter: actualy, logically it MAY never be abel t occur - but I see no harm in the prohibition - alts and all that
Cat Galileo: no unverified person can verify, so there shouldn't be a problem with people verifying their verifiier
Cat Galileo: oof
Benjamin Noble: Right.
Alexei Skjellerup: That's what I thought...
Benjamin Noble: Exactly. No unverified people can verify, so it won't come up. Wasn't this in the games section on the LSAT?
Julynn Lilliehook: right...so the clause is unecessary
Henri DeCuir grins.
PeterS Jenkins: its basically an excpetion to the fact that Ben and Sol are verifying each other
Jai Baxter: Ben, I;d take it as harmless - but up to you
Julynn Lilliehook: I am my own grandmother
Jai Baxter: oy
Cat Galileo: alts are an interesting point
Alexei Skjellerup: lol
Lexis Looming: Except that Ben adn Sol will ahve to be verified by someone they did not verify themselves
Jessica Holyoke: actually alts through everything into a loop
Jai Baxter: call Q
Jai Baxter: do we vote, or hold over a week?
PeterS Jenkins: vote now
Benjamin Noble: I say we can vote on this, but we need a clear statement.
Julynn Lilliehook: I prefer to not include a word that is not needed. Keep is concise.
Jessica Holyoke changes the record from through to throw
Philip Gloucester wonders if Ben and Sol could be alts
PeterS Jenkins: its necessary for public perception of the process
Alexei Skjellerup frowns...
Benjamin Noble laughs. I'd have a much cooler accent.
Julynn Lilliehook: Ppl here in years to come may interpret that differntly and will not refer to the x-scripts fro its intended meaning
PeterS Jenkins: why not refer to xscipts
Julynn Lilliehook: b/c ppl don't always do that if they think they know what somethign means w/o looking at the leg. history
Benjamin Noble: Basically, we need to acknowledge that Solomon and I can verify each other, which I think is reaonable, based on the fact that we both had real IDs tied to our avatars in mainstream press before this came up.
Julynn Lilliehook: Actually....it may be ambiguous language...
Benjamin Noble: But after that, no one can verify unless they have been already verified.
Henri DeCuir nods.
Alexei Skjellerup: Agreed...
Lexis Looming: Ben and Soll will verify the Board who will verify the initial committee. two ppl on the initial committee not verified by Sol and ben can verify Sol and ben
Henri DeCuir: Ben is pretty easily identifiable. As somebody who has dropped his name a dozen times or so... ;)
PeterS Jenkins: anyway GTG - you have my proxy to vote aye for that motion Ben
Julynn Lilliehook: I say we hold a group webcam....
Jai Baxter: Call Q on Lex' substitute
Benjamin Noble: Okay. The question is called.
Julynn Lilliehook: WE can make note of their scars and tattoos
Lincoln Beck smiles
Philip Gloucester: Believe it or not I have more hair in RL lol
Jai Baxter: ew... "aye"
Benjamin Noble: Lex proposes: Ben and Soll will verify the Board who will verify the initial committee. two ppl on the initial committee not verified by Sol and ben can verify Sol and ben.
Jessica Holyoke: I must admit, I see Ben and think Duranske and not Noble
Benjamin Noble: I'd love to have my real last name here.
Benjamin Noble: Question is called. Let's vote.
PeterS Jenkins: lobby SL - send corey O an email
Jai Baxter: don't wait up, sigh - "aye" again
Jessica Holyoke: aye
Julynn Lilliehook: What? The just added Clawtooth as a choice,
Sarah Amat: aye
PeterS Jenkins: aye
Lexis Looming: aye
Lexis Looming: aye
Julynn Lilliehook: Aye
Alexei Skjellerup: abstain
Benjamin Noble: All in favor, say aye. Opposed nay. Voting open to 11:17
Queen Coronet: aye
Henri DeCuir: aye
Benjamin Noble: Open to
Benjamin Noble gets a cup of coffee.
Jessica Holyoke: I have to head out , bye everyone
Julynn Lilliehook taps her wigtipped stiletto on her chair leg.
Lexis Looming: Bye Jessica
Alexei Skjellerup: ((I should be leaving, too...))
Jai Baxter: Ben, I will send a proposal on the "EB or those whose liaiblity and responsibility is subj to a wtriten plan" thing to the forums - if the pword works :)
Benjamin Noble: Bye Jessica.
Benjamin Noble: We'll wrap up after this.
Julynn Lilliehook: wingtipped that is
Benjamin Noble: Motion carries.
Benjamin Noble: Okay. Is there a motion to adjourn?
PeterS Jenkins: thanks Ben
Lexis Looming: so moved
Benjamin Noble: Any opposition, please stand (or sit, if you are standing).
Benjamin Noble: Motion carries.
Benjamin Noble: Thanks, everybody. We're adjourned.