board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

Charter Committee Ballot Archive

Post Reply   Page 3 of 3  [ 49 posts ]
Jump to page « 1 2 3
Author Message
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 08 Jul , 2005 3:09 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
BALLOT #41
July 7, 2005

In order to spare the Rangers the trouble of changing all the board permissions and redesignating the groups used to create permissions, it is proposed that the Mayor will not have access to the Sensitive Info forum but will have access instead to a second, hidden Mayor forum where record keeping will be maintained for outstanding penalties against members and outstanding warnings and complaints against Rangers.

Question1: Do you accept the creation of a second, hidden Mayor forum, and an amendment to Article 4 removing the text which gives the Mayor access to the Sensitive Info forum?

PLEASE SELECT
A=10: Yes
B=1: No

Some minor additional amendments are required in Article 4 and Article 5 to make them consistent. The part of the clause being amended is BLUE.

Question 2: under ¶1 of Article 4, concerning the right of the Mayor to request a deputy, the text will be amended to read:

• No provision is made for selecting an Assistant to the Mayor, however if a current Mayor decides that an Assistant Mayor is needed to fulfill the duties of this office, he/she may propose that the Charter be amended to provide for a selection process and the standing Committee for Charter Amendments will convene according to Article 7.

We did not have a committee named when this went for ratification

PLEASE SELECT
A=11: I agree to the amended text
B=0: I do not agree to the amended text

Question 3: under ¶1 of Article 4, we need to add the following as a second clause:

The Mayor may not serve as a Ranger, Juror, Loremaster, or Mediator during his/her term of office.

PLEASE SELECT
A=11: I agree to the inclusion of this clause
B=0: I do not agree to the inclusion of this clause

Question 4: under ¶2 of Article 4, concerning the record keeping for Mediators, the text is inconsistent with Article 5 and Article 5 will be amended to read:

• The list of those members who have also agreed to serve as Mediators will be posted prominently in the Bike Racks. Full names will be used so that PMs can be sent with ease. Dates of entry do not have to be posted but the date a member last served as Mediator will be shown.

In one article we had required entry dates and in the other excluded them

PLEASE SELECT
A=11: I agree to the amended text
B=0: I do not agree to the amended text

Question 5: under ¶3 of Article 4, concerning the forums used by the Mayor, Michel Delving is no longer part of the Outside Forum and the text should be amended to reflect this change. The amended text will read:

• A new subforum is created and entitled “Michel Delving” in which the Mayor will maintain those records that the Charter designates as public. The subforum will be a read and write forum so that members are able to discuss with the Mayor as needed and make the Mayor aware of developments that affect the Board.

before it said, "subforum of the Outside Forum"

PLEASE SELECT
A=11: I agree to the amended text
B=0: I do not agree to the amended text

Question 6: Subject to Question 1, the mayor will be excluded from the Sensitive Info forum and a second, hidden Mayor’s forum may be created. If that proposal is defeated, no other amendments need by made to ¶3 of Article 4. But if that proposal is approved, the text will be amended to read:

• A second subforum which is not readable by the members is created and entitled "Sensitive Information - Mayor" in order to maintain those records that the Charter designates as private. The Mayor will not have any Administrative powers other than permission to read and write in the Outside Forum so that Jury Pool and Mediator records can be maintained, and access to the hidden subforum entitled "Sensitive Information - Mayor" during his/her term of office.

before it said access to the “Sensitive Info forum of Rangers”

PLEASE SELECT
A=11: I agree to the amended text, subject to Question 1
B=0: I do not agree to the amended text

Question 7: And in the thread concerning Grounds for removing the mayor and Hearings to remove the mayor, we are providing that a loremaster should be present at hearings to remove the mayor. A similar provision should be made for hearings to remove a Ranger. The following clause would be added to Article 5, ¶6:

"Any Hearing to remove a Ranger will have a Loremaster in attendance."

PLEASE SELECT
A=11: I agree to the inclusion of this clause
B=0: I do not agree to the inclusion of this clause

Last edited by Jnyusa on Sun 10 Jul , 2005 11:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

_________________

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


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 08 Jul , 2005 3:11 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
BALLOT #42
July 7, 2005

Friends - we are not going to vote on every paragraph of this Article because much of it is boilerplate reference to the other relevant Articles of the Charter. I am putting the entire text into the ballot, though, so that you can see the flow of the Article. Actual questions, as you scroll down to them, are in CAPITALIZED, UNDERLINED BOLDED RED. Any place where you are asked to approve actual text, the text is in blue.

Article 11: Standing Committees and Ad hoc Committees

Board77 recognizes standing committees which can be convened at any time without a vote of the membership according to the terms described here.

QUESTION 1: approve the creation of a standing committee for Amendments to the Charter, subject to questions 2 and 3

¶1: Committee for Amendments to the Charter:

The purpose of this committee is to compose amendments to the Charter, to assure consistency between amendments and the existing Charter, and to conduct the ratification of amendments in accordance with Article 12, ¶2.

PLEASE SELECT:
A=11: I approve the creation of this committee
B=0: I do not approve the creation of this committee

QUESTION 2: approve these two mechanisms for convening the committee. The first is required by Article 5; second is the same as the mechanism for committee on binding votes

The committee will convene under two circumstances:

1. A Ranger has exercised Extraordinary powers requiring review in accordance with Article 3, ¶5. The committee will decide whether the circumstance is anticipated to occur again with sufficient frequency to justify an Amendment to the Charter;

2. An Initiative to amend the Charter is brought by the Mayor, or by two current Rangers, or by five members regardless of their status.


PLEASE SELECT
A=11: I approve these two mechanisms for convening the committee
B=0: I do not approve these two mechanisms for convening the committee

QUESTION 3: approve the composition of the commitee

Composition of the Committee
The committee will have an odd number of members, no fewer than seven, no more than thirteen. The Mayor and one Loremaster will be voting members of this committee. The composition of the rest of the committee will be as follows:

If the committee was convened after the exercise of Extraordinary powers by a Ranger, it will also include:
• the current Ranger who was involved in the incident and one other current Ranger;
• one former Ranger;
• a minimum of two volunteers from among the rest of the membership.

If the committee was convened by an initiative of the Mayor or two current Rangers, it will also include:
• the two current Rangers who brought the initiative;
• one former Ranger;
• a minimum of two volunteers from among the rest of the membership.

If the committee was convened by an initiative of the members, it will also include:
• one current Ranger;
• one former Ranger;
• a minimum of three volunteers from among the membership, one of whom will be a member who brought the initiative;
• and if five or more volunteers are accepted from among the membership, two of them will be members who brought the initiative.

The Committee will be convened by posting a sticky thread in the Business Forum and accepting volunteers in order until the committee is filled and composed as required. Any registered member may serve on the committee.


PLEASE SELECT:
A=10: I approve the composition of the committe under these various circumstances
B=1: I am uncomfortable with this and wish to discuss it more before voting.

Committee Procedure
The committee will convene in the Jury Room for deciding whether the Charter should be amended and for drafting the amendment. The committee itself will vote on elements of the amendment before presenting a final form to the membership for ratification.

The ratification procedure and the archiving of committee threads, ratification thread, and committee ballots with voting results must be completed in accordance with Article 12, ¶2.

QUESTION 4: approve the creation of a standing commitee for Binding Votes and Initiatives. All of the terms by which this committee operates are being voted on separately as Article 7 of the charter.

¶2: Committee for Binding Votes and Initiatives of the Membership:
The purpose of this committee is to decide whether a Binding Vote of the Membership should and can be held, in accordance with Article 7, and to conduct any subsequent voting process.

The provisions for convening this committee and the procedures they must follow are stated in full in Article 7. The committee may convene in the Jury Room for discussion, and the final ballot will be presented to the Membership in the Business Forum thread created for that purpose.

PLEASE SELECT:
A=11: I approve the creation of this committee
B=0: I do not approve the creation of this committee

QUESTION 5: approve the inclusion of the Election Committee in this article. All of the terms by which this committee operates were approved separately as Article 4, ¶4 of the charter.

¶3: Election Committee: The purpose of this committee is to convene and conduct the elections for the Mayor in accordance with Article 4, ¶4.

The committee may convene a thread in the Jury Room to coordinate the counting of the vote, but everything related to announcements, nominations, voting, and reporting of results to the members must take place in the Business Forum thread created for that purpose.

PLEASE SELECT:
A=11: I approve the inclusion of this committee in this article
B=0: I do not approve the inclusion of this committee

QUESTION 6: approve the creation of a standing committee for Technical support

¶4: Committee for Technical Support: The purpose of this committee is to communicate with our web host when necessary and to advise the membership on any technical questions relating to software and hardware capability. Members of the committee should have expertise in internet capability.

This committee should have no more than three members and may be convened by a Ranger or by the administrator of record (as designated to our web host) any time a question of a technical nature arises which cannot be readily answered by the membership.

The committee may convene in the Jury Room if necessary, but should maintain a thread in the Business Forum for communication with the membership.

PLEASE SELECT:
A=11: I approve the creation of this committee
B=0: I do not approve the creation of this committee

QUESTION 7: approve the creation of a standing committee for Business Matters

¶5: Committee for Business Matters: The purpose of this committee is to conduct the business interface with our web host, make final or interim selection of a host, ensure that backups are done on a timely basis, and delegate responsibility for aspects of moving the board from one host to another.

This committee will be convened upon ratification and will remain in existence as long as changing web hosts is a matter before the membership. The committee may dissolve itself when the move is complete, but may be reconvened at the request of any member if questions arise regarding the business aspects of our internet service. If members of the committee must be replaced, the administrator of record (as designated to our web host) may solicit volunteers by opening a thread in the Business Forum.

The committee may have seven or nine members. One current or former Ranger and the administrator of record (as designated to our web host) will be voting members of this committee.

The committee may convene in the Jury Room if necessary, but should maintain a thread in the Business Forum for communication with the membership.

PLEASE SELECT:
A=11: I approve the creation of this committee
B=0: I do not approve the creation of this committee

QUESTION 8: approve the text regarding ad hoc committees (an example of an ad hoc committee would be the committee we have now, composed of Mossy and Pips, to plan the July 6th opening).

¶6: Ad hoc Committees: All other committees are ad hoc committees, to be convened when a majority of current Rangers agree that a decision can be made by committee rather than by member vote and the decision does not fall within the purview of any standing committee. The size of an ad hoc committee can be decided by the Rangers, and any registered member may serve on such a committee. The Committee will be convened by posting a sticky thread in the Business Forum and accepting volunteers in order until the committee is filled.


PLEASE SELECT:
A=11: I approve the text regarding ad hoc committees
B=0: I do not approve the text regarding ad hoc committees

_________________

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


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 10 Jul , 2005 11:21 pm
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
BALLOT #43
July 9, 2005

We left zero time for the current Mayor to pick his/her two helpers, explain to the helpers how an IRV is done if that's an issue, set up the ballot with whatever url code is required, and post it.

I'm running a quick poll to move the Announcements and the Nomination period back five days to leave a 5-day window for the committee to get its' act together.

POLL:
I agree that Announcement and Nominations Period will begin 5 days earlier:
Yes = 9
No = 0

_________________

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


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 12 Jul , 2005 3:49 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
BALLOT #44
July 12, 2005

Amending Article 5 for Time Limitations on Hearings and Appeals

Question 1: Amend Article 5, ¶4: Hearings
Agreement with the following additional text, subject to Question 2

“If Rangers intend to convene a Hearing, they must do so within [seven days/ten days/fourteen days] of the time that the violation of by-laws comes to their attention. If a thread has been edited or deleted, the date signature of the Ranger will be taken as the date when the violation came to their attention and they will have until midnight GMT [seven days/ten days/fourteen days] later to convene a Hearing if they intend to do so. After that, the member may not be called to a Hearing and no penalty may be imposed.”

A = 9: I agree with this text, subject to Question 2
B = 0: I do not agree with this text

Question 2: Statute of Limitations on a Hearing should be:

RANK
A = 4: seven days
B = 5: ten days
C = 0: fourteen days

Question 3: Amend Article 5, ¶5: Hearings on a Ban - agreement with the following additional text

“If an Immediate Ban is placed on a member, the member has 91 days in which to request in writing that the ban be reversed in order for a Hearing on the evidence to be held. After that the deleted thread(s) need not be held in storage, and if a Hearing to reverse the ban is requested at a later date, the jury may use whatever criteria it finds appropriate for deciding the duration of the ban.

A = 9: I agree with this text
B = 0: I do not agree with this text

Question 4: Amend Article 5, ¶8: Appeals - agreement with the following additional text”

If a decision or a penalty is to be appealed, the member must appeal within 91 days of the date the Hearing was closed, or before the penalty has expired, whichever comes first. After that time, an appeal will not be allowed.

A = 9: I agree with this text
B = 0: I do not agree with this text

_________________

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


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 17 Jul , 2005 1:45 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
BALLOT #45
Article 12, ¶2: Amendments to the Charter

July 20, 2005

Part of the text of this Article (concerning the composition of the Charter committee) has already been approved by us and is shown below the ballot. It will not be part of this ballot, but there is a bit of overlap in the clauses, so I have shown text already approved in green to make it clear where the new text will fit in. Text choices to be voted on here are shown in blue as usual.

Question 1: Approving the remaining text for Committee Procedure, subject to Question 2.

The committee will convene in the Jury Room for deciding whether the Charter should be amended and for drafting the amendment. The committee itself will vote on elements of the amendment before presenting a final form to the membership for ratification.

The membership will be given ten full days to discuss the amendment. During that period, anything deemed controversial may be removed and tabled for later consideration, or the amendment may be withdrawn. Following the discussion a yes/no poll will be posted in the thread and members will vote for ten full days , two weekends inclusive, whether or not to ratify the amendment.

A Global email will be sent to all registered member at the start of the discussion and at the start of the vote.


Note: This text has been copied from the ratification procedure we are using now with very slight modification, i.e. that the amendment may be withdrawn, and that voting takes place in the thread. I would like to vote here on whether the two-weekends inclusive requirement is still needed. (It drives me crazy.)

A = 10: I approve the additional text
B = 0: I do not approve

Question 2: two-weekends inclusive

A = 4: Keep the requirement that votes run for two weekends inclusive
B = 6: Omit the requirement that votes run for two weekends inclusive

Approving a new clause: Quorum and Majority Requirements

Question 3: Defining a quorum

RANK after runoff:

A = 0: There will be no quorum, therefore no text concerning a quorum need appear in this clause.

B = 1: [Text] In order for a ratification vote to be valid, votes must be cast by 30% of the number of members active over the past sixty days.

C = 1: [Text] In order for a ratification vote to be valid, votes must be cast by 23% of the number of members active over the past 60 days.

D = 8: [Text] In order for a ratification vote to be valid, sufficient votes must be cast to reach a quorum, defined as follows:
• Records will be maintained for the proportion of members who voted in the last seven elections that required a quorum. [Note:this excludes the mayor election which does not require a quorum]
• ‘Proportion of members who voted’ will be calculated as the number of votes cast divided by the number of members active over the sixty days prior to the vote.
• A moving average of those last seven proportions will be calculated, converted to a percentage, and 5% will be deducted to account for variation.
• The resulting percent will be multiplied by the number of members active during the sixty days prior to the posting of the ratification thread, and that will be the number of votes required for a quorum.

Question 4: Approve this text - needed only if option D wins in Question 3.

Records necessary for calculating a quorum will be maintained by the Mayor and posted in Michel Delving where the members can see them.

A = 10: I approve the text
B = 0: I do not approve the text

Question 5: Approve this text - needed if any option other than A wins in Question 3.

The number of votes that must be cast to reach a quorum will be posted in the ratification thread.

A = 10: I approve the text
B = 0: I do not approve the text

Question 6: Approve this text - needed if any option other than A wins in Question 3.

If the vote has not attained a quorum at the end of the voting period, voting may be extended for an additional seven days. If, at the end of the extension period, a quorum has still not been obtained the proposition will be considered defeated.

A = 9: I approve the text
B = 1: I do not approve the text

Question 7: Approve the text - [this is the super-majority we are using now and the one we approved for Binding votes]

In order for an Amendment to be ratified, 67% of those voting must approve. This provision will be posted in the ratification thread.

A = 10: I approve the text
B = 0: I do not approve the text

Question 8: Approve the following provision; choice of text depends on the quorum method we select in Question 3

If Option A wins, no text is needed.
If Option B or C wins, the text will read:
If two successive votes fail to achieve a quorum, the Committee for Amendments to the Charter will convene to reconsider our participation requirements.
If Option D wins, the text will read:
If the quorum as calculated from a moving average falls below 20%, the Committee for Amendments to the Charter will convene to reconsider our participation requirements.

Note: This would be the third circumstance under which a Charter committee would convene. The Article on Standing Committees currently names only two. Official ratification discussion has begun for that Article so I cannot amend it at this time. We will have to add this amendment to those we will be making later for purposes of charter consistency. Just f.y.i.

A = 10: I approve the inclusion of this provision
B = 0: I do not approve the inclusion of this provision

Question 9: This is not text - approve consistency between binding votes and amendments:

Whatever quorum requirements are approved here will also apply to Article 7: Binding Votes and that article will be amended accordingly.

A = 9: I agree
B = 1: I do not agree

Approving a new clause: Archiving the Voting Results

Question 10: Approve the text

When voting has concluded (or the amendment has been withdrawn), the threads used by the committee in the Jury Room and the ratification thread in the Business Room will be archived in the forum entitled “Threads of Historical Interest”. A Directory thread will be created and links to all individual threads related to Charter Amendments will be posted there, preferably in chronological order, so that it will be easy for members to find and review them.

A = 10: I approve this text
B = 0: I do not approve this text

_________________

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


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 17 Jul , 2005 3:10 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
BALLOT #46
Privacy Policy

July 20, 2005

This ballot proposes four separate amendments to previously ratified Articles in order to incorporate a privacy policy into the charter. We will vote on each Amendment separately.

Question 1: Approve the amendment

UNDER:
Article 3: Rangers (Administrators)
¶4: Routine Powers
......Rangers may not:


CHANGE:
• Edit or delete posts or lock threads without permission of the originator unless the originator has engaged in conduct justifying an immediate ban;

TO:
• Delete posts or lock threads without permission of the originator unless the originator has engaged in conduct justifying an immediate ban, or edit posts except in the circumstances specified in paragraph ¶5;

A = 10: I approve this amendment
B = 0: I do not approve this amendment

Question 2: Approve the amendment

UNDER
Article 3: Rangers (Administrators)
¶5: Special and Emergency powers


CHANGE:
• Edit Posts if they contain objectionable content, for example: abuse of another poster, defamatory remarks, pornographic, violent or distasteful content, or advertisement of products.

TO:
• Edit Posts if they contain objectionable content (for example, abuse of another poster, defamatory remarks, pornographic, violent or distasteful content, or advertisement of products), or if they reveal personal information that compromises another poster's privacy or contain any personal information about a minor.

A = 10: I approve this amendment
B = 0: I do not approve this amendment

Question 3: Approve the amendment

UNDER
Article 5: Dispute Resolution
¶9: Offenses That Merit a Penalty
......Offenses for which the maximum penalty is a temporary ban if this is not the first offense and the problem appears to be persistent


ADD:
• Deliberately posting personal, real life information about another member such that their privacy is compromised, or posting any personal information about a minor.

A = 10: I approve this amendment
B = 0: I do not approve this amendment

Question 4: Approve the amendment

UNDER
Article 2: Member Rights
¶1: Rights and responsibilities enforceable by procedures and penalties outlined in the Charter
A. You have the right:


ADD:
• to be protected from revelation of personal information about yourself that would compromise your privacy, and to have such information edited from any post at your request;

A = 10: I approve this amendment
B = 0: I do not approve this amendment

_________________

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


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 17 Jul , 2005 3:22 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
BALLOT #47
July 20, 2005

In addition to amending the quorum clause in this article (Ballot #45), we have two other paragraphs for which amendments have been proposed.

Changes proposed to text regarding revotes

The text that we approved reads as follows:


A binding vote cannot be held for a proposition that has been defeated by an earlier vote during the past 6 months and the same proposition cannot be voted on more often than twice in one year. It is the responsibility of the Committee to determine whether the proposed vote is allowable. If the committee is divided, a straw poll will be taken and a simple majority of the committee members will decide whether the vote is allowable.

Question 1: It is proposed to remove the redundancy shown in blue, so that the first sentence will begin:

A binding vote cannot be held for a proposition that has been defeated by an earlier vote during the past 6 months ...

A = 10: I agree
B = 0: I do not agree

Question 2: It is proposed to add text at the end of that first sentence to clarify the conditions of a revote. Several options are proposed. The full text as it would read with each addition is shown as an option below. (The redundancy has been removed in these options but will be left in if B wins in Question 1.)

RANK after runoff:


A = 5: A binding vote cannot be held for a proposition that has been defeated by an earlier vote during the past 6 months unless a genuine change of circumstances justifies holding an additional vote. It is the responsibility of the Committee to determine whether the proposed vote is allowable ....

B = 5: A binding vote cannot be held for a proposition that has been defeated by an earlier vote during the past 6 months unless a genuine change of circumstances or serious ramifications not previously recognized justify holding an additional vote. It is the responsibility of the Committee to determine whether the proposed vote is allowable ....

C = 0: A binding vote cannot be held for a proposition that has been defeated by an earlier vote during the past 6 months unless a genuine change of circumstances affecting all members justifies holding an additional vote. It is the responsibility of the Committee to determine whether the proposed vote is allowable ....

D = 0: A binding vote cannot be held for a proposition that has been defeated by an earlier vote during the past 6 months. It is the responsibility of the Committee to determine whether the proposed vote is allowable ....
Note: this option contains no additions to the text


Tie between A and B was broken by asking three members outside the committee to confer and vote. 2 votes for A, 1 for B. Committee approved this result July 20, 2005.

Question 3: It is proposed to remove two items from ¶5. Currently the text reads:

¶5: Actions which cannot be undertaken without a Binding Vote of the Membership
1. Moving to a new server
2. Altering the terms of ownership for the board
3. Elimination of a Forum and/or restructuring of the forums which would entail mass renaming and/or moving of subfora and threads.
4. In the deletion of threads, any departure from the policy stated in Article 8.
5. In the creation of new forums, any departure from the policy stated in Article 9.


The need to hold a binding vote for exceptions to the general policies stated in Article 8 and 9 is already contained within each of those Articles, therefore #4 and #5 on the list above are redundant and could lead to an undesirable contradiction between Articles 7, 8 and 9. It is proposed that these last two list items be removed.

A = 10: I agree
B = 0: I do not agree

Last edited by Jnyusa on Wed 20 Jul , 2005 10:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

_________________

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


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 17 Jul , 2005 3:43 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
BALLOT #48
July 20, 2005

Approving the text of Article 8: Policy on Thread Deletions

Question 1: approve opening statement.

“Our policy is to not delete threads for any reason except those stated in this Article.”

A = 10: I approve this opening statement
B = 0: I do not approve this opening statement

Approving the text of ¶1: Routine Exceptions, subject to your choices for the text shown in blue (where applicable)

Question 2: approve this routine exception

• Obsolete Announcements, obsolete FAQ threads, and Jury Room threads used by the various committees in their work may be moved to the forum entitled Threads of Historical Interest.

A = 10: I approve this routine exception
B = 0: I do not approve this routine exception

Question 3: approve this routine exception, subject to Question 4

• Hearing threads that an involved member has asked to be deleted will be moved to Deleted Thread Storage for [ten days/two weeks/one month/] beyond the expiration of the member's right to appeal under Article 5, ¶8. Then the thread will be deleted permanently. (These threads are not moved or deleted except by member request.)

Note: A5,¶8 is 91 days or the expiry of the penalty, whichever comes first

A = 10: I approve this routine exception, subject to Question 4
B = 0: I do not approve this routine exception

Question 4: length of time Hearing threads marked for deletion will be held beyond the expiration of right to appeal
RANK after runoff:

A = 3: ten days
B = 0: two weeks
C = 7: one month

Question 5: approve this routine exception, subject to Question 6

• Threads moved to Deleted Thread Storage by a Ranger because of their objectionable content will be held for [two weeks/one month/three months/] beyond the period in which a Hearing may be convened under Article 5, ¶4. If a Hearing is convened, the threads will be held throughout the Hearing and [result of Question 4] beyond the expiration of the member's right to appeal under Article 5, ¶8. (These threads can be deleted without member permission because they contain objectionable content and can no longer be used as evidence.)

Note: A5,¶4 is 10 days

A =10: I approve this routine exception, subject to Question 6
B = 0: I do not approve this routine exception

Question 6: length of time Objectionable Content threads will be held beyond the Ranger’s right to convene a Hearing

RANK after runoff
A = 1: ten days
B = 0: two weeks
C = 8: one month
D = 0: three months

Question 7: approve this routine exception, subject to Question 8

• Threads moved to Deleted Thread Storage because they resulted in an Immediate Ban imposed on the member will be held for [ten days/two weeks/one month/three months/] beyond the expiration of the member's right to request a reversal of the ban with evidentiary arguments under Article 5, ¶5.

Note: A5,¶5 is 91 days

A = 10: I approve this routine exception, subject to Question 8
B = 0: I do not approve this routine exception

Question 8: length of time spam/porn/bannable threads will be held beyond the member’s right to request a reversal using the thread as evidence

RANK after runoff
A = 0: ten days
B = 4: two weeks
C = 6: one month
D = 0: three months

Question 9: approve the final text of this paragraph

The expiry date of a thread will be noted in the thread when it is moved into Deleted Thread Storage.

A = 10: I approve this text
B = 0: I do not approve this text

Question 10: Approving the text of ¶2: Other Exceptions

¶2: If it seems necessary to delete a thread in order to preserve the peace, security or continuance of the board, a Binding Vote of the membership must be held to do this.

A = 10: I approve this text
B = 0: I do not approve this text

_________________

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


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 17 Jul , 2005 4:01 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
BALLOT #49
July 17, 2005

Corrections needed to make the Charter Consistent throughout. All of these are necessary but they involve changes of actual text or moving things around and so they need to be read and approved. Each change will be a separate question for your approval.

Question 1:

In Article 5, ¶3, under Jurors are selected in the follow manner, it says:

No juror may be a current administrator.

That provision belongs in ¶2.

A = 9: I agree to move the provision to ¶2
B = 0: I do not agree

Question 2:

In Article 3, ¶2 it says:

• The same person may serve as Ranger more than once, but not in two consecutive terms.
• A member may not begin a term of office if they are currently involved in any capacity in a Hearing involving another Ranger or a Hearing on a Ban.
• Registered members as of March 12, 2005 are eligible to serve as Rangers providing they have spent enough time on the experimental board to demonstrate an ability to perform the routine functions of a Ranger, and are not currently involved in any capacity in a Hearing involving another Ranger or a Hearing on a Ban.


In Article 5 (disputes) we specified that a member cannot begin a term of office if they are involved in a Hearing or if they are under a penalty. The first underlined phrase should be changed to: a Hearing. The second underlined phrase should be changed to: in a Hearing or under a penalty.

A = 9: I agree to change the underlined phrases
B = 0: I do not agree

Question 3:

In Article 3, ¶3 it says:


• Service as a Ranger is entirely voluntary. It is not linked to service as a jury member except insofar as current Rangers are barred from serving on certain juries. A member who has agreed to serve as a Ranger and has entered the pool may withdraw their name at any time.

That was written for the old arbitration system. The underlined sentence is redundant now over the provisions of ¶2 and can be removed.

A = 9: I agree to remove the underlined phrase
B = 0: I do not agree to remove the underlined phrase

Question 4:

In Article 3, ¶3 it says:


volunteers will remain on the training roster for at least ten days.

• While volunteers are on the training roster, all members are responsible for reviewing the roster to determine whether they know any good reason why a particular volunteer would not make a good Ranger and should not immediately enter the pool of full Rangers when their training is complete. If no member expresses a concern or objection volunteers will enter the pool of full Rangers without delay. If a member does have a concern or objection to a particular volunteer, these must be sent by email to the Administrator account, where they will also be forwarded to the Mayor so that the Mayor together with current Rangers can review them for merit.


It proved expedient in Michel Delving to list New Entrants separately from Rangers-in-training New Entrants are listed when they agree to serve and they remain listed for 10 days. Rangers-in-training are listed as such for as long as they feel the need to train. I Suggest that underlined passages above be changed as follows:

volunteers will remain on a roster of new entrants for at least ten days.

While volunteers are listed as new entrants

A = 9: I agree to change the underlined phrases
B = 0: I do not agree

Question 5:

In Article 3, ¶4 it says:


• Edit or delete posts or lock threads without permission of the originator unless the originator has engaged in conduct justifying an immediate ban

This was written before penalties were established. Not all things that warrant editing are punishable by a ban under Article 5. Suggest the underlined phrase be changed to the following, to make it consistent with ¶5:

• Edit or delete posts or lock threads without permission of the originator unless the originator has engaged in conduct that warrants a Hearing or an immediate ban.

A = 9: I agree to change the underlined phrase
B = 0: I agree to change the underlined phrase

Question 6:

In Article 3, ¶5 it says:


• Temporarily suspend posting rights or restrict access to a forum:
1. In the Invite Forum, if information about the contents of an invitation thread has been revealed to a nonmember, access can be suspended [this provision becomes void if the Invite Forum is removed]


This entire clause can be removed because we removed the forum while still writing/ratifying the charter. Other clauses must be renumbered.

A = 9: I agree to remove this clause and renumber the other clauses
B = 0: I do not agree

Question 7:

In ¶5, under Extraordinary Powers of Rangers it says:


Such measures are temporary by their nature and subject to review by [some body as yet to be determined.]

That body is now known. It is the standing Committee for Charter Amendments. I propose we insert the name of the committee now.

A = 9: I agree to insert the name of the committee
B = 0: I do not agree

Question 8:

In ¶7: How to Contest Decisions of a Ranger it says:


• In more serious cases, like bannings, or a poster feeling treated unjustly when having their posting rights restricted, etc. there is a more formal case from the outset and the procedures are described in the article on Member Rights.
• Members may contest in the following way any Ranger decisions made while exercising the routine powers of Rangers, such as edits, moving threads, etc.


There are no procedures described in Member Rights. I think what we were trying to say here was that if a Member is called to a Hearing, then the Hearing itself is the mechanism they use to state their side of the issue. So that this clause here only applies to lesser disagreements over the way routine powers were exercised. I suggest that we rephrase both of these bullet points so that they read:

• If a Ranger has convened a Hearing, then the member will explain their side of the issue at the Hearing.
• Ranger decisions made while exercising routine powers (such as edits, moving threads, etc.) may be contested in the following way:


A = 9: I agree to amend these two clauses as shown
B = 0: I do not agree

Question 9:

In Article 3, ¶8, under Grounds for formal complaint it says:


• Failing to convene and oversee a Hearing when required, or refusing to convene a Hearing on a ban when this is necessary.

It is no longer necessary to distinguish two kinds of Hearing (formerly said ‘arbitration’). This can be changed to: • Failing to convene and oversee a Hearing when required

A = 9: I agree to amend the clause as shown
B = 0: I do not agree

Question 10:

In Article 5, ¶5 it says:


Hearings on a Ban are convened and conducted in the same manner as Hearings on a Community Disruption, except that a recommendation by a jury to ban a member for indefinite duration is not final.

We changed the name of simple Hearings. Clause should be changed to:

Hearings on a Ban are convened and conducted as described in ¶4

A = 9: I agree to amend the clause as shown
B = 0: I do not agree

Question 11:

In Article 5, ¶5 it says:

• Convene a Hearing to reverse a ban if the following three conditions are met:
1. if the duration of the ban was not specified;
2. the banned poster has requested a new Hearing in writing;
3. at least one month has elapsed since the ban went into effect; Rangers can postpone a requested hearing longer but not more than three months.


Alandriel tells me that the underlined phrase in #2 must read:
... has requested a new Hearing in an email sent from the email address used to register;

A = 9: I agree to this addition
B = 0: I do not agree

_________________

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


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 3 of 3  [ 49 posts ]
Return to “Threads of Historical Interest” | Jump to page « 1 2 3
Jump to: