board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

Convention: Admin Powers

Post Reply   Page 23 of 24  [ 461 posts ]
Jump to page « 120 21 22 23 24 »
Author Message
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 17 Apr , 2005 5:44 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
How close are we to a ballot on this stuff, people?

This article on admins has been a rather complicated one for me to assemble, and this is the last paragraph that we have to vote on.

I am anxious to put this behind me, write the summary and begin the discussion process among the membership so that I can take a break from having to watch the threads so often.

Just by the way, the committee has shrunk from 21 people to 16 semi-regular voters.

Does anyone have anything substantive to add to Special Powers, or can I start formulating a ballot and get rid of this?

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 17 Apr , 2005 5:48 am
Offline
 
Posts: 5172
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Ballot! Ballot!!!!


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 17 Apr , 2005 6:56 am
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Ballot! Ballot!!!!

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 17 Apr , 2005 7:19 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
Draft Ballot Posted
Here


Jn

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
truehobbit
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 17 Apr , 2005 1:29 pm
WYSIWYG
Offline
 
Posts: 3228
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:37 pm
Location: wherever
 
Ahh, Faramond, glad to have given a linguistic insight! :D :cool:

Voronwe, thanks, I like the summary you gave. :)

It's just a side issue at the moment, I think, but maybe for further clarification:
I don't know the Japanese stuff that was mentioned, so I can't comment on that.
When the texts spoke of erections I immediately thought of ancient Greek art (vase paintings) - I can't imagine why anyone would want that in a sig, but if it came up, would people here think that was acceptable or not? (Just for example.)
And I suppose we are talking about really explicit stuff here, but what, for example, about the pic of the Bernini-sculpture I posted in the art-thread:

[ img ]
It's not "explicit", but I find it pretty erotic and, well, rousing. :)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Back to the difficult (for me) subject of bannings and hearings:

Jny, thanks, yes, the third post is helpful.

I'd just like to summarise this in my words, to make sure I have this sorted out alright:

There are cases when there is an immediate ban, and others where a poster might be banned after a hearing.

If there's an immediate ban, there must (?) be a hearing to reverse or uphold the ban
- when the duration of the ban is not specified AND a certain time has elapsed AND the poster has asked for hearing to reverse the ban.

If these are correct, I'm puzzled by the following:

- on the one hand there must be a hearing, but on the other the poster has to ask for it - isn't that a contradiction?

- And a bit further down it says in case of immediate bans the duration is never specified - so condition one is always fulfilled necessarily? Or are there other cases where bans might be of unspecified duration?

- does it also mean that in other cases (ie not immediate bans) there can be a hearing to reverse a ban if those three conditions are met?

- what happens if there's ban after a hearing? Are there any circumstances under which a poster may ask for a reversal of the ban? Or are all such bans temporary? (Though I suppose this belongs under member rights.)

Lastly, it says:
Quote:
Admins have power to convene a hearing to reverse a ban if the following three conditions are met
- does that mean they could also refuse a hearing?

Then there's the question I also addressed in the ballot thread - the inclusion of the forth point in the list bugs me somehow.
Jnyusa wrote:
Admins have power to enact an Immediate Ban
for the following offenses if the poster has registered within the last seven days:
• Spamming the board with ads
• Spamming the board with porn
• Hacking the board
• Refusing to abide by the Decision of Jury in an Arbitration
• Threats of real life violence or other criminal acts against members
In all other cases the poster has the Right to a Hearing, and if the poster registered more than seven days ago they are considered a member of the community and have a right to a hearing for these offenses as well, but their posting rights will be restricted to the Jury Room for the duration of the hearing.
I can't really imagine someone who's been here less than seven days already under some decision through arbitration.

I agree we need to make such rulings enforceable, but I think it's impossible in such a case for the poster to have been here for less than a week, so this would have to be a hearing on a ban and forum restriction, rather than an immediate ban, wouldn't it?
Also, it still seems to me a very different sort of offense from the others in that list.
So, on the whole I think this point might be better in the list of: Admins have power to temporarily suspend posting rights or restrict access to a forum

I'm sorry if this is all a bit confused - hope you guys can make some sense of it. :)

_________________

From our key principles:

We listen to one another, make good-faith efforts to understand one another, and we treat one another respectfully at all times.


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 17 Apr , 2005 5:09 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5172
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
hobby, I would not have an objection to someone using that picture.


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 17 Apr , 2005 5:25 pm
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
TH:
- on the one hand there must be a hearing, but on the other the poster has to ask for it - isn't that a contradiction?

On the one hand there can be a hearing, but the poster has to ask for it. In other words, it's not automatic.

- And a bit further down it says in case of immediate bans the duration is never specified - so condition one is always fulfilled necessarily?

Yes. Prim suggested that this be a provision of immediate bans so that it would place them among those things for which a hearing to reverse would be required. The logic is that the person who registers in order to spam overnight is not going to come back and argue to be let in. We should be able to just get rid of those people and not think about them anymore.

Or are there other cases where bans might be of unspecified duration?

There might be, when we discuss 'maximum sentences' in the next part of the agenda

- does it also mean that in other cases (ie not immediate bans) there can be a hearing to reverse a ban if those three conditions are met?

Yes

- what happens if there's ban after a hearing?

A hearing would always specify a time limit. We already agreed that there would be no permanent bans

- does that mean they could also refuse a hearing?

Well, both the Code of Conduct and the Routine Powers paragraph state that an admin must convene an arbitration or a hearing on a ban when that is needed ... I think I added to that hearings to reverse a ban and if it's not there we can add it for specificity ... but ...

when that is needed implies discretion on the part of admins. So, just as there are cases where one member might demand that another be banned, and the admins say, 'forget it - not a bannable offense,' there might be cases where a poster requests a hearing to reverse and the admins refuse because they doubt their sincerity for some reason.

I think it would be a mistake, though, to remove all discretion from admins because then we would have to foresee and provide for every possible thing that might happen and this is impossible.

So, on the whole I think this point might be better in the list of: Admins have power to temporarily suspend posting rights or restrict access to a forum

I continued this discussion in the Special Powers thread with the draft ballot. I want to hear other people's opinion about this, too, because I am unsure myself whether it belongs.

Jn

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 17 Apr , 2005 5:34 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5172
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Quote:
I think it would be a mistake, though, to remove all discretion from admins because then we would have to foresee and provide for every possible thing that might happen and this is impossible.
This is the most important thing that anyone has said in all of our discussions thus far.


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 17 Apr , 2005 5:40 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Absolutely. Discretion of judgment is necessary and "safe," since we are also building in transparency and accountability.

And Hobby, that picture is beautiful. :)

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
truehobbit
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 18 Apr , 2005 1:25 am
WYSIWYG
Offline
 
Posts: 3228
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:37 pm
Location: wherever
 
Thanks! :)

Good to hear that pic wouldn't be considered inappropriate, I take it then that we are really only talking crass, explicit or tasteless stuff, right?

As to my other questions, thanks for answering them Jny. I'm fine with leaving some discretion to the admins for the cases we can't foresee - very wise - and I agree with a lot of things re the necessity of enforcement etc - but I still think having "refusing to abide..." with the provision where it's now rather than the next one is reacting too strongly - have posted about it in the other thread. :)

_________________

From our key principles:

We listen to one another, make good-faith efforts to understand one another, and we treat one another respectfully at all times.


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 18 Apr , 2005 6:29 pm
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
Two more votes have been put up, folks, and voting will begin this afternoon/evening, depending on where in the world you live. :)

These are the last two votes, and then the Admin section is done, such as we were able to conclude it.

That means that this can be opened for a discussion of the membership by the end of this week - and I am pushing hard to do so. In that regard, I would like to proposed here that the Articles we have been working on be renumbered before the members have to ratify them. The reason for this is to present the final version of the Charter in a logical order, instead of the order in which we discussed things.

I am posting here, and repeating it in one of the first three posts of this thead (forget now which one has the outline in it), A Summary of the Articles and the Article Numbers that I think should apply. I want to give everyone a chance to discuss the wisdom of this, before we open specific article numbers for ratification. If no one voices objections by Friday of this week, I will go ahead and renumber the Articles.

Here's the Structure of the Charter as I see it:

The Red Book of Board 77
Last Homely House on the Web

Part I. Our Mission
Part II. Our Principles
Part III. Ownership of B77
Part IV. Our Goals
Part V. Our Administrative and Governance Procedures
Article 1: B77 is a member moderated board
Article 2: Member Rights and Responsibilities
Article 3: Administrators
¶1: Number of Administrators and Terms of Office
¶2: Eligibility of Members to Serve as Administrators
¶3: Selection of Administrators
¶4: Routine Powers of Administrators
¶5: Special and Emergency Powers
¶6: Code of Conduct for Administrators
¶7: How to Contest the Action of an Administrator
¶8: When is an Administrator Removed from Office
Article 4: Office of the Mayor
Article 5: Resolution of Disputes

Article (.): Ratification of the Constitution

*****
So what we have been working on and calling Article 2 would become Article 3. Next up on the agenda would be Article 5.

Any objections?

Jn

Last edited by Jnyusa on Tue 19 Apr , 2005 3:01 am, edited 2 times in total.

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 18 Apr , 2005 6:35 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
:love:

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Eruname
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 18 Apr , 2005 7:25 pm
Islanded in a Stream of Stars
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 8748
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:24 pm
Location: UK
Contact: Website
 
Don't see why not. :)

_________________

Abandon this fleeting world
abandon yourself.
Then the moon and flowers
will guide you along the way.

-Ryokan

http://wanderingthroughmiddleearth.blogspot.com/


Top
Profile Quote
Faramond
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 18 Apr , 2005 8:56 pm
Digger
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 1192
Joined: Tue 22 Feb , 2005 12:39 am
 
Article 2: Member Rights and Responsibilities

Well, philosophically, that's what I think it should be.


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 18 Apr , 2005 9:09 pm
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
Good call, Faramond. I'm going to add that to the outline in all three places where the outline appears. :)

Jn

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 18 Apr , 2005 9:21 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5172
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
:love:


Top
Profile Quote
*Alandriel*
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 18 Apr , 2005 9:58 pm
*Ex-Admin of record*
Offline
 
Posts: 2372
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 10:15 am
 
Yep :D Good to see member rights and responsabilities right up there immediately under WE ARE A MEMBER OPERATED BOARD.

byline - tou shall slave away to make this the best place EVA!!! :D

Did I get carried away a little? :oops:

:halo:

Looks fabulous Jny :love:

.. and I guess the OWNER issues are still being tackled? It's also got to be in there at some point ;)

_______________
Resident witch
[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 19 Apr , 2005 2:59 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
Very good, Alandriel! I'll add it now.

Jn

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 19 Apr , 2005 5:58 am
Offline
 
Posts: 5172
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
At what point in the process will be be discussing the ownership issues. I'll need to make sure that I've done my research before then. :)


Top
Profile Quote
*Alandriel*
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 19 Apr , 2005 6:34 am
*Ex-Admin of record*
Offline
 
Posts: 2372
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 10:15 am
 
Voronwe: I think I can safely say you yet have some time.

From the way I see it, we'll be digging our teeth first into Article 5 - Resolution of Disputes, then probably Art 2 - Member Rights and Responsibilities and only then we can start with Owner issues. Looking forward to being dazzled :cool:

_______________
Resident witch
[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 23 of 24  [ 461 posts ]
Return to “Threads of Historical Interest” | Jump to page « 120 21 22 23 24 »
Jump to: