4 Hearings and the Selection of a Jury for Hearings
Board77 recognizes three kinds of hearings….
good with me
A sufficient number will be selected at the beginning to allow each affected member to contest two/three jurors and still have seven jurors remaining. For cases involving a single individual, this would be nine/ten potential jurors. No juror may be a current administrator.
two (less haggling than over three
and
nine
Each member involved will then have the right to contest two/three of the proposed jurors. They are not required to contest any but they have the right to do so.
two
Of the jurors that remain after the selection process, the first six (in order of entry) will hear the case, and one alternate will attend in the event that a regular juror must leave or be removed. No more than six jurors will make the final decision.
Please focus discussion on ‘six jurors,’ the presence of an alternate, rejection versus selection by the member, and selection in order of entry to pool
fine with me.
5 Procedure for Hearings on a Violation of By-Laws/Community Disruption
Community disruption I like better
If the problem is brought to the attention of the administrators by another member, two/three administrators must agree
two agree with Jny's reasoning
The posting rights of the member in question will not be restricted over the course of the hearing on the strength of another member’s report. Only an administrator observing a violation of by-laws directly, or a jury after hearing a case, may impose a penalty on a poster.
I agree
Any procedural questions raised by the jury should be referred to the Mayor/an appointed administrator/some new officer who will be responsible for the application of the Charter.
The Mayor He/she is the person with the most in depth knowledge of the constitution (a basic job requirement) and therefore is better suited for this than an Admin (whose positions are rotated more frequently and have 'other jobs' as a priority). If necessary, the Mayor could call for an assistant to be selected from amongst previous Admins but only for the duration of that hearing.
Jury deliberations may be held in private, by PM or email. Jurors should strive to reach a decision within ten days. Agreement by four of the six jurors will be considered a decision.
May I suggest also the possibility of having a 'secret' forum for them only to do that? Access solely to the jurors involved and locked and DELETED after the deliberations are open? Four out of six is good with me
If the recommendation to ban is overturned by a vote of the membership, the poster will be on three-month probation. If new bannable offenses are committed during that period, a new jury will be convened according to the same terms as above, but this time the decision of the jury will be final. Please focus discussion HERE. Probation period was not decided by members prior to committee
Definitely agree with a 3 month probation period during which there can be only 2 more violations (with new hearings) – on the 3rd offence during the probation period the poster will be banned or temp banned according to the outcome of the jury's verdict upon the last hearing (all within the probation period). The slate is wiped clean IF there after the probation has passed.
8 Procedure for Hearings to Remove the Mayor from Office
All of this is new, and if you wish we can postpone the final discussion of this paragraph until we have written the Article about the Office of the Mayor. What is here is based directly on the rules for removing an admin, with the added provision of a petition by the members as suggested by some people
No objections what-so-ever with this so far. The exact job description of the Mayor is still in the process but what you have so far here is fully in line and I definitely agree on the added provision of a petition
9 Appealing the Decision of a Jury
For me, the blue text should read
Mayor. E.g. The member will present their Appeal in writing to the Mayor and the Mayor will forward it to the three Administrators… etc.
Fabulous stuff
Jny
And TORN:
you're suggestion as to
The gist of what I'm proposing is that member rights operate at two levels -- a precatory level that says "these are the high standards that we as a community strive to achieve", and an enforceable level that says "these are the minimum standards by which you as a member of this community must abide."
is exactly
what I have in mind too…. but I guess we'll get to that in more detail (based on what we already have in Admin powers) when we get to members rights & obligations.
There are always grey areas though, e.g. sig pics for one
What to one is tasteful to another is outrageous. In such cases ideally the conflict ought to be resolved amongst the members in bike-racks, but – of course – it might end up in the jury room depending on how the involved parties manage to resolve it … or not. Thing is, we have the bike-racks as our first 'line-of-defence' and it is my hope that 99% of all 'cases' will be resolved there, amongst the membership. Only very clear offences e.g. spamming, overtly threatening behavior will bypass the bike-racks. We've got already quite a list of what constitutes a violation and I'm sue we'll somewhat expand on those. There is also the 'Code of conduct for members'
_______________
Resident witchâ„¢