board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm

Locked   Page 2 of 10  [ 182 posts ]
Jump to page « 1 2 3 4 510 »
Author Message
Estel
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 5:28 pm
Pure Kitsch Flavor
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5159
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:47 pm
Location: London
 
Also, one of us is supposed to be an altnerate. Do the Rangers decide this, Hal or do we decide among ourselves?

Secondly, we should choose one of us to be in charge - what do they call that in real life? Basically, the person who will keep us organized and inform the board of our decision once it is reached.


Top
Profile
Ara-anna
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 5:33 pm
Daydream Believer
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5780
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 11:15 pm
Location: Pac Northwest
 
The head juror is the Foreman.

A head juror is called the foreman or presiding juror. The role of the foreman is to ask questions on behalf of the jury, facilitate jury discussions, and sometimes to read the verdict of the jury.

_________________

Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in

Five seconds away from the Tetons and Yellowstone


Top
Profile
halplm
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 5:48 pm
b77 whipping boy
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 9079
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 4:40 pm
 
Estel, we were not banned for two weeks. In fact, SF's only current restriction is not posting in the symposium.

It was my understanding that laureanna would be the alternate, as the final person on the list.

_________________

I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.


Top
Profile
Estel
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 5:55 pm
Pure Kitsch Flavor
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5159
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:47 pm
Location: London
 
Gotcha. I was wondering about that.


Top
Profile
Angbasdil
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 8:41 pm
The man, the myth, the monkey
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 1138
Joined: Tue 01 Mar , 2005 10:16 pm
Location: Back in Nashville
 
I'm here.

Like Estel, I would like to see specific instances of the alleged behavior. I assume that, as in offline court, the burden of proof lies with the accusers. Therefore, I need someone to point me to the particular thread(s) where this behavior took place, and to explain why (from a legal standpoint) the behavior warrants further punishment. Also, could the PM in question be forwarded or copied for the jury to evaluate? (I'm sure I'll have follow-up questions BTW).

Thanks.
----------------------------
My fellow jurors,

Do we want to elect/appoint a Foreperson? Logistically, how should we proceed? What guidelines should we use for when to discuss here and when to go to PM? (In case you can't tell, I'm new to this jury thing.)


Top
Profile
halplm
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 9:18 pm
b77 whipping boy
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 9079
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 4:40 pm
 
All such discussions of evidence are supposed to happen here. Only deliberations are private.

_________________

I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.


Top
Profile
Angbasdil
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 9:24 pm
The man, the myth, the monkey
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 1138
Joined: Tue 01 Mar , 2005 10:16 pm
Location: Back in Nashville
 
Thanks, hal. I needed to know that and will keep it in mind.


Top
Profile
ToshoftheWuffingas
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 9:47 pm
Filthy darwinian hobbit
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6921
Joined: Fri 11 Mar , 2005 12:52 pm
Location: Silly Suffolk
 
I presume it is up to us as jurors to search out evidence for and against the request for action. The system does not allow for a prosecution to present the case and the defence is in the hands of the person under review and the witnesses that they may call.

_________________

[ img ]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos

Norwich Beer Festival 2009


Top
Profile
Angbasdil
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 9:57 pm
The man, the myth, the monkey
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 1138
Joined: Tue 01 Mar , 2005 10:16 pm
Location: Back in Nashville
 
ToshoftheWuffingas wrote:
The system does not allow for a prosecution to present the case...
That can't be right. When a hearing is deemed to be appropriate, those who deemed it to be so must show why.
To do otherwise is simply unworkable.


Top
Profile
halplm
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 9:58 pm
b77 whipping boy
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 9079
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 4:40 pm
 
I'm sorry to be doing this... I'm not trying to be difficult, but it is confusing to me what to defend myself against, assuming the first action in the hearing is to provide my own defense. Theoritically, this is because the violations of the by-laws that have lead to the hearing are clearly understood by the rangers opening the hearing. Here is what they have stated in the opening post, with my comments and questions:
Rebecca wrote:
On January 23, 2009, halplm had his posting rights to the Symposium restricted.

His posting rights were restricted after several warnings from Rangers. Halplm continued to disrupt the Symposium forum in many threads with his arguing in a non-productive manner with sauronsfinger. The nature of this arguing created what we felt was a forum-wide disruption and prevented members from being able to participate in fruitful discussion in that forum.

After halplm's posting rights were restricted, he continued his disruptive behavior in the Business Room forum and Turf forum and in the current Charter discussion thread (which is reserved for members of the committee). After further warnings, his board-wide permissions were restricted to the Bike Racks forum.

Soon after this, halplm sent out a Private Message to all members with the highest post counts. This generated many complaints, so his Private Messaging capabilities were then limited.

After starting multiple threads in the Bike Racks forum, in response to threads in other forums that he didn't have access to, we restricted halplm's ability to start new topics.
That is a fairly accurate relation of the events that took place, although naturally I would object to some of the characterizations. However, there are no details on what violations of the by-laws were commited in the opinion of these rangers. There is verbage that sounds similar to by-laws, and is surely meant to invoke the idea that I must have done something wrong, but there must be specifics both to warrent a hearing, and to allow me to defend myself.
Quote:
There was no one action of halplm's that warranted any suspension of posting rights. It was the totality of the issue that forced the Rangers to act. Given the numerous PM's and complaints within threads in regards to halplm, the Rangers felt a serious action was required.
This seems to indicate that the rangers acted without regards to whether or not any by-laws were violated, simply on their own opinions, and those of members that complained to them. I have no problem with this on an extremely temporary basis, in case they need to sort things out or determine what coarse of action to take. However, suspending of posting rights requires a hearing, and a hearing requires adequate cause, which is not feelings and complaints.
Quote:
Initially, the Rangers felt a 2-week suspension of posting rights in the Symposium was warranted, but given his further disruptions to the board and his extensive history with board disruptions, the Rangers feel further action is needed.
Well, my "extensive history" is not really at issue as the charters specifically states someone cannot be brought up for a hearing or any sort of punishment unless the actions were within the last 10 days.

But more importantly, the rangers "feelign" a 2-week suspension of posting rights in the Symposium, is neither relevant or allowed. There are specific instances where a poster's rights to post in a specific forum can be suspended:
Emergency Powers section of the Charter wrote:
• Temporarily suspend posting rights or restrict access to a forum:
1. In the Jury Room, if poster has interfered with a Hearing on a Ban, board-wide posting rights can be suspended until the Hearing is concluded;
2. In the There and Back Again forum, if more than one complaint has been made against the way an RP identity has been used, posting rights can be suspended until a Hearing can be held regarding the continuation of that identity;
3. In the Thinking of England Forum, if more than one complaint has been made about the way a poster has been posting there, posting rights can be suspended until a Hearing can be held to determine the right of continued access to that forum;
4. If a sig pic is arguably pornographic, violent or distasteful it can be removed; and if the poster persists in reposting it, posting rights outside the Jury Room can be suspended until a Hearing decision is reached.
Note that this is the "Emergency Powers" section, which already well outside the "routine" powers of rangers. As the Symposium is none of these forums, and my sig pic was a lolcat, there was no power given to rangers that allowed them to do this.

There is the "Extraordinary" powers section as well, that allows rangers to pretty much do whatever they want to "protect the board... [given] an event which threatened real and immediate harm," but I don't personally believe any number of posters posting even extremely heatedly, would be such a situation. I expect we shall have to discuss this further.
Quote:
As it stands now, halplm has not engaged in any actions that would qualify him for a banning under the current Charter. Therefore, the Rangers are asking the jury to mete out a punishment that is stern enough to deter this behavior from happening again.


-Rebecca, Holbytla, and Riverthalos
Lurker, please correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not believe it is the place of the rangers to suggest or request any type of punishment from a hearing.
Quote:
Added by Riverthalos from the Notice to Convene a Hearing posted in the Bike Racks:

This is a Notice to convene a Hearing against halplm on the following charges:
He has neglected his responsibility to refrain from using PM capability to harass other members of the board.
He has infringed on everyone's right to be treated with courtesy and respect by all posters regardless of their status, and the responsibility to treat others likewise.
The Notice was posted well after the posting rights were suspended. The first charge has to do with the sincle PM I sent out to 50 people, to make sure others were aware of the situation as they would likely not go into the bikeracks, and my ability to communicate with anyone was being reduced very quickly. We can argue if this was harassment or not, but I would like someone to clearly state how my PM violated the by-laws.

The second charge is difficult to parse. "Everyone's right to be treated..." and the "responsibility to treat..." are two sides of the same coin. If you "break" one, you "break" the other. I would also argue in the strictest sense, it has been violated by everyone on the board many many times. It is the vaguest right or responsability in the whole charter, and while I'm sure it can be proven I have broken it, the same could be said of almost everyone on the board.

If I am to be accused of doing so in some egregious manner, as would either justify the original suspension of rights, or a hearing for further reasons, then the "Events" of the first part of the ranger's post, must be linked to this accusation in a clear and concise way, so that I can defend myself, and evidence can be presented of specifics.


I apologize for talking so much just to try to get things clarified, but I've felt this way since the original suspension was announced.

_________________

I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.


Top
Profile
Holbytla
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 10:09 pm
Grumpy cuz I can be
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6642
Joined: Thu 09 Dec , 2004 3:07 am
 
The rangers had a limited amount of time to get this hearing underway.
We have spent numerous hours over the past few days getting all of this material ready and have had to ooperate without a full compliment of rangers.

We plainly have not had the time to go into the Symposium, Business Room, and Bike Racks to link every example that led us to this decision. You were told that you would have a more detailed explanation tonight when we have had the time to compose it.

Even with that, it is well within everyone's ability to go to the Symposium and see for themselves on display the behavior that led us to this decision, the warnings, and the pleas for us to take action.

This did not happen in a vacuum, so while you are waiting for a comprehensive post detailing the accusations, feel free to browse the messageboard and see for yourselves what transpired.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile
halplm
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 10:15 pm
b77 whipping boy
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 9079
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 4:40 pm
 
That is not the correct way to do this.

The rangers create the hearing, presenting the violations that lead to it in a clear manner.

The accused makes a defensive case.

The jury decides, calling witnesses and such as needed by the jury or the accused.

The rangers do not get to "build a case" as it were, only answer questions if they are called as witnesses.


The rangers do not run the hearing, they are not in charge here, they do not get to exert their will over the process.

(edit. nm, it's 10 days...)

_________________

I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.


Top
Profile
Holbytla
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 10:21 pm
Grumpy cuz I can be
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6642
Joined: Thu 09 Dec , 2004 3:07 am
 
You were notified why your posting rights were suspended.
The jury is well within their rights to call us as witnesses and ask for specific reasons.
The hearing was convened well before the time limit was up.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile
halplm
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 10:25 pm
b77 whipping boy
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 9079
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 4:40 pm
 
Well, I guess I had better let the jury try and figure out what by-laws you're accusing me of breaking and how... as it hasn't been done since.

I would request that Lurker not let the Rangers, who are also the accusers, do anything out of order.

I won't post any more here until it is determined what the procedure should be, and what I'm actually accused of.

_________________

I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.


Top
Profile
Ara-anna
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 11:11 pm
Daydream Believer
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5780
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 11:15 pm
Location: Pac Northwest
 
Rangers,

What reasons do you have for the specific actions taken regarding Hal? Please be as specific and detailed as possible.

I would ask for some time for the Rangers to respond and for the jurors to have the opportunity to review said evidence. More than just a few hours or even a day or two.

Is it also possible for those posters who are not rangers who also wish to testify for either prosecution or defense to be called upon? If they don't mind. I also wonder that perhaps they contact the Loremaster to see if they can be brought forth to be questioned by the jury, so as to not have a ton of people posting at the same time. To better explain the poster would contact the Loremaster, the Loremaster would contact this thread, and we the jury, Hal, and the Rangers could ask questions. And is this ok with you Hal?

I would like all evidence put forth to make sure the hearing is done in all fairness to everyone. Also at this point perhaps we can do this like a case, let the Rangers present first and then Hal present second.


And again these are just thoughts and my own feelings, as I would like to see all the evidence for or against before doing anything else. I feel it only prudent to do so.

_________________

Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in

Five seconds away from the Tetons and Yellowstone


Top
Profile
Riverthalos
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 11:14 pm
bioalchemist
Offline
 
Posts: 5205
Joined: Wed 16 Mar , 2005 2:10 am
Location: at a safe distance
 
hal, check the opening post again.

Jurors, I have seen your multiple requests and I will post the Ranger's side of the story sometime tonight.

_________________

"He attacks. And here I can kill him. But I don't. That's the answer to world peace, people."
-Stickles Shihan


Top
Profile
Ara-anna
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 11:15 pm
Daydream Believer
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5780
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 11:15 pm
Location: Pac Northwest
 
Thank you River. We will wait for you're post later.

_________________

Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in

Five seconds away from the Tetons and Yellowstone


Top
Profile
halplm
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 11:18 pm
b77 whipping boy
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 9079
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 4:40 pm
 
I would like Lurker to lay out the plan, as it's his job to make sure the charter is followed accurately.

I also want all involved in presenting evidence to be very clear on this part of the charter:
Quote:
If the Rangers intend to convene a Hearing, they must do so within ten 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 ten 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.
Which clearly states that no hearing can be brought against me for any reason prior to 10 days ago. Any such events have nothign to do with this hearing.

If River posts out of turn, I request the jury have it removed, and the proper procedure takes place.

_________________

I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.


Top
Profile
Rebecca
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 11:21 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3463
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 10:34 pm
Location: Fall River, MA
Contact: Website
 
I would also like to point at that, so far, River, Holby, and I have put forth a lot of our time on this.

So please, give us some time.


River has said she'll post something tonight.

I, personally, am barely able to deal with this any longer and am ready to just leave right now. So, I'm stepping away from this thread for the night and will try to assist River in stating our case sometime tomorrow. I know Holby feels the same way. We have spent hours and hours dealing with this and am fed up with it. Anything I post now will not be productive in moving this case forward.

Hal, continuing to demand that we take action "right now" for everything you request is unreasonable and I would ask that you have some patience.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile
Holbytla
Post subject: Re: Hearing on disruption of the Symposium Forum against halplm
Posted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 11:26 pm
Grumpy cuz I can be
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6642
Joined: Thu 09 Dec , 2004 3:07 am
 
halplm wrote:
I would like Lurker to lay out the plan, as it's his job to make sure the charter is followed accurately.

I also want all involved in presenting evidence to be very clear on this part of the charter:
Quote:
If the Rangers intend to convene a Hearing, they must do so within ten 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 ten 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.
Which clearly states that no hearing can be brought against me for any reason prior to 10 days ago. Any such events have nothign to do with this hearing.
If River posts out of turn, I request the jury have it removed, and the proper procedure takes place.
Quote:
General Guidelines for imposing penalties
The Jury generally has discretion to impose the penalty it considers appropriate as long as the maximum penalties specified below are not exceeded.

If this is a first offense and the Jury feels that the time already restricted to the Bike Racks or the Jury Room is sufficient, or if they feel confident that because of the circumstances in which the error took place it is very unlikely to be repeated, they are not obligated to impose a penalty.

If the offense is restricted to a single forum (e.g. There and Back Again or Thinking of England) the penalty may also be restricted to that forum (e.g. temporary or permanent suspension of posting rights).

The penalty ought to relate as closely as possible to the offense; for example, if abusive use of PM’s is the offense, then PM privileges may be disabled.

Penalties may be greater for second, third or multiple offenses than they are for first offenses.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Locked   Page 2 of 10  [ 182 posts ]
Return to “Threads of Historical Interest” | Jump to page « 1 2 3 4 510 »
Jump to: