Possible concept for a new forum or group- comments wanted.

I had thought of proposing a mock warcrimes tribunal a la The Hague, featuring the prosecution of certain members of a rogue administration we all know and loathe. However, that may become a bit complex, due to appointments of judges, prosecutor, defenders, and so on. (We all KNOW who the criminals are.)

So in lieu of such a weighty and cumbersome thing, would a straightforward posting forum work, where we merely gather as much of the factual (and documented) war crime information on them as possible? Just to bring it all into one place-- sort of a database of information that one day may be forwarded to the REAL trials (which I sincerely hope take place).

I was thinking it could simply be called the War Crimes Forum.

Just tossing the concept out there-- feel free to yea or nay it, or to refine it as you desire.

It's just a thought, previously posted in the Lounge as a trial balloon (pun intended).

It is a great idea, but it is also one that can easily be taken out of context by outsiders. There is also the problem of disrupters ruining the exercise with idiotic assertions, far-out conspiracy theories, and general disruption aimed at taking the wind out of the sails. We are all very aware of how far trolls and the like will go to disrupt our efforts. I agree with the idea in principle; however, I wish there was a way we could somehow control who would be admitted into the forum -- a sort of screening process. I think the idea is totally valid in light of the fact that such trials have been held before against the likes of God, and yes, war criminals. I vote YEA with strict methods to keep the forum on point and pre-screened.

It could be as simple as just a database of information-- items submitted for inclusion without comment. But I know it would be difficult to do this in the best of conditions. It would be nice, though.

I like the idea of the mock-trials, too. As a team, we could write some as scripts and have them performed, perhaps.

Unscripted is what I think the OP meant. People would have roles, but they would not have "lines". Just like a genuine war crimes trial the perpetrators would be tried by a panel of judges. People would present evidence, there would be examinations and cross-examinations, etc.. Correct me if I am wrong about your idea, OP, but certain people would have to play devil's advocate; that is, the role of the criminals and their defenders, yes?

In this case people would volunteer for certain roles then probably be voted in or out by a poll or something like that. And they'd have to be willing to stay the course, or at least until someone appropriate volunteers (and is approved) to take over.

As I said, probably way too complex for a message board, but on the other hand there are a lot of intelligent and clever folk here!

However, I am confident that the intellectual prowess of DU's members could rise to the occasion.

People have roles.

The result of this exercise is a script.

is a laying out of real world facts that can be documented and referred to outside the scope of our little game. Nothing but provable facts will be submitted and examined-- hearsay would be ruled out of order, just like an actual court of law. The intent would be to prove treason and other high crimes by those who would destroy our country, by using actual documentation (of which there is a great amount floating around).