board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

RATIFIED: Article 5: Dispute Resolution

Post Reply   Page 1 of 3  [ 46 posts ]
Jump to page 1 2 3 »
Do you accept this article as written?
Poll ended at Tue 21 Jun , 2005 12:06 am
Yes.
  
98% [ 58 ]
No.
  
2% [ 1 ]
Total votes: 59
Author Message
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject: RATIFIED: Article 5: Dispute Resolution
Posted: Tue 31 May , 2005 11:58 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5174
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Members of B77:

We are now opening the discussion and ratification of Article 5: Dispute Resolution in the Outside Forum.
Here is a summary (prepared by Jn) of this Article. The full charter can be read HERE

We will discuss from Tues May 31 ~11:59 pm GMT to Fri Jun 10 ~11:59pm GMT. We will vote from Fri June 10 ~11:59pm GMT to Mon Jun 20 11:59pm GMT.

The purpose of the discussion is to uncover controversial items and remove them before voting. Please speak freely. Thanks, V.


SUMMARY
Article 5: Dispute Resolution in the Outside Forum


The Bike Racks Forum (¶1)

The board will not intervene in disputes of a personal nature between members. We provide The Bike Racks forum where members can resolve disagreements.

If one or more members are disrupting a thread, the admins can split off the disruptive posts and send them to a new thread in the Bike Racks, but posters cannot be compelled to participate there. If they walk away from the argument, that’s OK.

Posters in the Bike Racks can ask for mediation if they want it. Mediators are members of the Jury Pool who have said they are willing to mediate as well as serve on juries. Thread participants must agree on one mediator.

Jurors (¶2, ¶3)

There will be a Jury Pool, and members become eligible to serve as jurors after 3 months and 100 posts. The Mayor is responsible for informing members when they become eligible. There is no board-wide objection process for entry into the jury pool as there is for entry into the administrative pool.

Six jurors will be used to decide a hearing. Jurors are selected in the order in which they entered the pool, given their availability (and age, if a TOE violation is involved). Members involved in a hearing are allowed to contest two jurors, so a sufficient number of jurors are assembled at the beginning to allow for objections. A current admin is responsible for assembling the jury.

Hearings (¶3, ¶4, ¶5, ¶6)

Hearings are held for violations of the by-laws, or to remove an admin or elected official from office. In cases that do not involve banning, jurors are allowed to impose penalties subject to restrictions set by the charter and listed below. In the case of a banning, members at large afterwards vote whether to uphold a banning decision by a jury.

The actual procedure for a Hearing is described in ¶4.

The board-wide voting provisions for a Hearing on a Ban are described in ¶5; and the provisions for a Hearing to Remove an Administrator are described in ¶6. We have postponed discussion of ¶7, Hearings to Remove an Elected Official, until after the Article concerning Elected Officials is finished.

Appeals (¶8)

Decisions made by a jury and penalties imposed by a jury can be appealed. A group of administrators hears the appeal and the process is described in ¶8.

Offenses that Merit a Penalty and Maximum Penalties a Jury May Impose (¶9)

Hearings can only be held for violations of the by-laws recognized by the charter, and juries are limited in the penalties they can impose for particular violations.

In general:

• An immediate ban can be imposed for spamming the board with ads or pornography, hacking the board, refusing to abide by the decision of a jury, threatening real life violence, or deliberately introducing a virus.
Immediate bans do not specify a duration, and the member must petition to have the ban reversed. (The petition process is contained in Article 3: Administrators, ¶5: Special Powers)

• A temporary ban of specified duration can be imposed for persistent posting of objectionable content or pictures, using the board for illegal purposes, repeatedly exposing other members to viruses through negligence, and using PM’s or email to harass or defame other members.

• For other violations, first offense penalties are restricted to temporary suspension of posting rights in specific forums.

Archives (¶10)

Interesting cases can be summarized and posted in the Archive Forum with the names of the posters removed.

Last edited by Voronwë_the_Faithful on Tue 21 Jun , 2005 12:03 am, edited 6 times in total.

Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 01 Jun , 2005 2:16 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
Voronwe, thank you so much for taking care of getting all these threads up. Everything looks good!

(p.s. I sent you the member rights link by PM. Just never got to it before.)

Jn

_________________

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


Top
Profile Quote
Frelga
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 01 Jun , 2005 3:37 am
A green apple painted red
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 4623
Joined: Thu 17 Mar , 2005 9:11 pm
Location: Out on the banks
 
Quote:
The board will not intervene in disputes of a personal nature between members. We provide The Bike Racks forum where members can resolve disagreements.
This confused me for a moment, since we are the board. ("We are Board. You will be assimilated"), and it is inevitable that people will intervene into the disputes, as indeed they have done in the past when they felt one member was unfairly harsh on another. After reading the actual articles, I didn't see anything about the non-interference. Did I miss it? Or did you mean board as a shorthand for "admins-at-the-time"?

EDIT: I guess what I'm trying to ask is whether there's any rule being introduced that regulates how members should react to personal disputes before they reach the Bike Racks proportion. But now I confused mysel even more. I'll go play badminton now. :oops:

Last edited by Frelga on Wed 01 Jun , 2005 3:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

_________________

GNU Terry Pratchett


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 01 Jun , 2005 3:45 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
Frelga,

We have no formal procedure for intervening in personal disputes - no admins stepping in to decide who's right and who's wrong, no arbitrations, no hearings, no penalties.

Anything of a personal nature gets resolved at the Bike Racks by the members who are involved.

That's what the sentence is supposed to mean.

Jn

_________________

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


Top
Profile Quote
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 01 Jun , 2005 4:07 am
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
Maybe it should read the admins, though. Since the Bike Rack is part of the board, the board is getting involved despite not meaning to.

The wording looks confusing, but I understood what it meant.

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 01 Jun , 2005 4:11 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
Well, I can rephrase it, TED, it you feel it will avoid confusion ... rather, Voronwe can rephrase it because it's inside his post :)

But the summary above is not the actual charter. The actual charter simply describes the accessibility of the Bike Racks and indicates our lack of involvement in personal disputes by saying absolutely nothing about them.

Jn

_________________

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


Top
Profile Quote
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 01 Jun , 2005 4:31 am
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
Frelga wrote:
("We are Board. You will be assimilated")
:D
Quote:
and it is inevitable that people will intervene into the disputes, as indeed they have done in the past when they felt one member was unfairly harsh on another.
Yes, this is just what is hoped for, since we are member-moderated. We will all shame each other into behaving properly. :)

What is crucial here is the phrase "of a personal nature." There is no official interference in disputes of a personal nature (as opposed to disputes that involve a violation of enforceable by-laws, which then become a community matter, since the enforceable by-laws are in place to protect the community as a whole).

Quote:
After reading the actual articles, I didn't see anything about the non-interference. Did I miss it?
You didn't miss it. The statement about non-interference is a broad summation of the difference between Bike Racks situations, where members involved in personal difficulties may go to resolve things, and Hearing situations, in which someone has violated an enforceable by-law and official action is taken by an admin or admins to initiate a hearing.

Quote:
I guess what I'm trying to ask is whether there's any rule being introduced that regulates how members should react to personal disputes before they reach the Bike Racks proportion.
Believe me, you have no reason to blush. You should have seen the complicated discussion around this question!

I don't believe there is anything specifically stated that regulates how members should react to personal disputes before they reach the Bike Racks proportion. I think it rests entirely on the concept of self-moderation and member discretion. The hope is that gentle nudges from other posters in a thread will be enough to diffuse a situation before it escalates to the Bike Racks stage, that is, before the posters themselves decide to go to Bike Racks, before other posters request that they take it to Bike Racks, or before it disrupts the thread enough that an admin splits the disruptive posts and puts them in Bike Racks.

I apologize profusely if I have only added to your confusion. Thank you so much for asking the questions. It is so important that people ask about what they don't understand. And if this hasn't covered it, please ask some more! :)


Top
Profile Quote
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 01 Jun , 2005 4:58 am
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
Maybe, I guess it's not that serious, Jn, especially if this is just a summary.

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 01 Jun , 2005 5:24 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
To add one thing for Frelga ... if members are complaining that someone's argument is disrupting their thread, the admins can split the argumentative posts off to a new thread in the Bike Racks -- a power to be used with a great deal of care. But we can't and don't force the posters to remain in the Bike Racks.

Basically, if two people, say, are determined to keep going back into a regular thread and disrupting it with a personal argument, there's nothing we can do officially except to keep splitting them off into the Bike Racks.

But it is hoped that the disdain of other members for that kind of behavior would be sufficient to prevent it.

If the argument turns prejudicial, e.g. with racial comments or real threats or something like that, it's a different matter. Then the posts can be edited by the Admin and if the problem persists the poster(s) can be called to a hearing.

Jn

_________________

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


Top
Profile Quote
Frelga
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 01 Jun , 2005 6:08 am
A green apple painted red
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 4623
Joined: Thu 17 Mar , 2005 9:11 pm
Location: Out on the banks
 
Quote:
But it is hoped that the disdain of other members for that kind of behavior would be sufficient to prevent it.
I really think this is our best hope, and it has already proved to work.

_________________

GNU Terry Pratchett


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 05 Jun , 2005 1:39 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
IMPORTANT NOTICE

Dear Members,

The committee has been debating the need for a person to provide oversight on Hearings, to ensure that procedure is followed and leave the jurors and other participants free to concentrate on substantive matters.

We have decided that this independent oversight person needs to be a volunteer from the Jury Pool rather than the Mayor or an Administrator, and that means that Article 5 which you are now discussing has been amended to include an oversight provision.

The following text is being added to ¶4 Hearings:

"A jury may request that an independent member provide procedural oversight of their hearing to ensure that proper procedure is followed and to act as a resource for hearing participants, allowing the participants to concentrate on substantive issues. Members of the Jury Pool who have volunteered to familiarize themselves thoroughly with the Charter and to act in this oversight capacity are designated as Loremasters in the Jury Pool list. Service as a Loremaster in a particular hearing is voluntary.

"A member may not serve as Loremaster to a Hearing if they are involved in the Hearing in any other capacity; and if a Hearing that employed a Loremaster is appealed, the Loremaster must be prepared to explain to the Appeals panel the rationale behind procedures that are in question.

"If the Jury makes use of a Loremaster, the Loremaster's name and function will be listed in the first post of the thread along with the jurors and the administrator(s) who convened the Hearing."

Also, in ¶5 Hearings on a Ban, a clarification approved by the committee has been added, that the membership vote to uphold a ban is only required when the ban is of indefinite duration.

_________________

"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 06 Jun , 2005 10:05 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5174
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
First post edited to match format of other ratification threads.


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 11 Jun , 2005 12:08 am
Offline
 
Posts: 5174
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Voting is now open (slight delay caused by computer crash :().


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 11 Jun , 2005 12:33 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
voted :)

_________________

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


Top
Profile Quote
Eltirwen
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 11 Jun , 2005 4:37 am
Bored Silly
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 548
Joined: Thu 10 Mar , 2005 10:28 pm
Location: Fidgeting
 
Voted :blackeye

_________________

Searching for my sanity...

"A life lived in fear is a life half lived" - Strictly Ballroom


Top
Profile Quote
TIGG
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 11 Jun , 2005 7:49 am
bouncing forward, eyes straight ahead
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 713
Joined: Sun 06 Feb , 2005 6:10 pm
Location: bouncin'
 
voted :)

_________________

[ img ]

Horsin' Around with Mista Strikey.


Top
Profile Quote
MaidenOfTheShieldarm
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 11 Jun , 2005 4:48 pm
Another bright red day
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2402
Joined: Sat 12 Mar , 2005 10:35 pm
Location: Far from the coast of Utopia
 
Voted. :cool:

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Griffon64
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 11 Jun , 2005 5:35 pm
Garrulous Griffon
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2147
Joined: Fri 05 Nov , 2004 12:21 pm
Location: Moving away from the madding crowd
 
Voted! :D

_________________

moment's hurt may harm or scar
but not inert nor beaten are
those who look and see afar
the healing hand of morning's star.


Top
Profile Quote
TORN
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 12 Jun , 2005 5:26 am
THE GREAT AND POWERFUL
Offline
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Sun 06 Mar , 2005 2:30 am
 
perhaps surprisingly, I swallowed hard and voted "yes"


Top
Profile Quote
Frelga
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 12 Jun , 2005 5:47 am
A green apple painted red
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 4623
Joined: Thu 17 Mar , 2005 9:11 pm
Location: Out on the banks
 
I voted. And it's still unanimous. Now where's the fun in that? :D

_________________

GNU Terry Pratchett


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 1 of 3  [ 46 posts ]
Return to “Threads of Historical Interest” | Jump to page 1 2 3 »
Jump to: