So, the specific charges were as follows:
Please note, I have included specific questions for the Rangers, for Hal below and for the board in general below. Questions for the board in general may be answered in a PM to one or all of the jurors.
1.
Article 9
Offenses that Merit a Penalty and Maximum Penalties a Jury May Impose
.........
• A temporary ban of specified duration can be imposed for persistent posting of objectionable content......
2.
Article 2
From Member Rights and Responsibilities - Note, this is NOT from the part that says no penalites can be enforced.
1: Rights and responsibilities enforceable by procedures and penalties outlined in the Charter
A. You have the right:
To address personal disputes in the Bike Racks forum, and in other forums to post free of disruptions caused by the personal disputes of others.
3.
Article 2
Member Rights and Responsibilities - Note, this is NOT from the part that says no penalites can be enforced.
B. You have the Responsibility:
.....
To refrain from using PM capability to harrass other members of the board.
4.
From Article 5: Dispute Resolution in the Outside Forum
¶1: The Bike Racks Forum
The Bike Racks Forum is a read and write forum available to all members. It is used for:
• resolving disputes between individual members when these disputes do not involve a violation of board rules;
• off-topic discussions that are derailing a thread but do not warrant a thread of their own;
• restricting posters who have provided invalid email addresses.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
A number of questions for the Rangers:
You may answer these questions individually or as a group.
These questions are for the Rangers only. If you are not a Ranger, please do not comment on them, or on the Rangers answers.
If anyone who is not a Ranger comments on their questions or answers, I will ask the Rangers to remove that response in order to keep the information clear.
Hal, there is a set of questions for you as well. Please do not comment or respond on the Rangers questions or answers. You will have a chance to refute or defend against them at a later time.
These questions are for information gathering purposes only.
Please note, some of these questions will be exactly the same, and have the same answers, but because they are for different violations, I would appreciate if the Rangers would answer them seperately in the order the questions are asked.
Also, some of the same links I will ask to be posted by both the Rangers and Hal. Even if the other has already posted the link, I would appreciate it if both parties could do so in order to verify that they are identical, and resolve the issue if they are not. These links have specifically to do with the questions regarding the Bikeracks.
1. In relation to Article 9 - Persistent posting of objectionable content.
First, How many board members PMed the rangers to object about Hals posts, how many multiple complaints there were, and how many board posted complaints there were?
Second, in the current instance, when was the behavior first noticed and how many warnings, both in PM and out in the threads, were given before the initial act to remove permissions from the Symposium was taken?
Third, when was the behaviour outside of the Symposium noticed, and how many warnings, both in PM and out in the threads, were given before the decision was made to remove all permissions other than that of the Bike Racks?
2. In relation to Article 2, Members Rights and Responsibilities
Violation of the right for members to post free of disruptions caused by the personal disputes of others.
First, How many board members PMed the rangers to object about the ongoing dispute between Hal and SF, how many multiple complaints there were, and how many board posted complaints there were?
Second, in the current instance, when was the behavior first noticed and how many warnings, both in PM and out in the threads, were given before the initial act to remove permissions from the Symposium was taken?
Third, did the disruptions continue outside of the Symposium? If so, when was it noticed, and how many warnings, both in PM and out in the threads, were given before the decision was made to remove all permissions other than that of the Bike Racks?
3. In Relation to Article 2, Members Rights and Responsibilites
Violation to refrain from using PM capability to harass other members of the board
First, How many members recieving the PMs emailed, PMed or posted complaints about receiving the PM?
Second, Was a warning given to Hal, either on the board, by email or through PM before the PM privileges were revoked?
4. In Relation to Article 5,]¶1: The Bike Racks Forum
First, a violation may have occured when threads were started in response to threads outside the Bikeracks Forum. What were these threads?
Were any of them split, thus causing there to be more of these threads than originally started by the posters?
If there were threads split, can you link to each thread, seperating them into those originated by Hal, and those originated by the Rangers through the splitting process.
Second, A violation of use may have occured when multiple threads dealing with the same issue were started.
What were these threads?
Were any of them split, thus causing there to be more of these threads than originally started by the posters?
If there were threads split, can you link to each thread, seperating them into those originated by Hal, and those originated by the Rangers through the splitting process.
Third, a violation of use may have occured when multiple threads were started that did not involve resolution of disputes.
What were these threads?
Were any of them split, thus causing there to be more of these threads than originally started by the posters?
If there were threads split, can you link to each thread, seperating them into those originated by Hal, and those originated by the Rangers through the splitting process.
Forth, how many violations of this sort occured before the Rangers made the decision to restrict posting rights?
Fifth, Was a warning given to Hal, either on the board, by email or through PM before posting privileges were revoked?
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
A number of questions for HAL:
These questions are for Hal only. If you are not Hal, please do not comment on them, or on Hal's answers.
If anyone who is not Hal comments on his questions or answers, I will ask the Rangers to remove that response in order to keep the information clear.
Rangers, The set of questions for you is above. Please do not comment or respond on Hal's questions or answers.
These questions are for information gathering purposes only.
Please note, some of these questions will be exactly the same, and have the same answers, but because they are for different violations, I would appreciate if Hal would answer them seperately in the order the questions are asked.
Also, some of the same links I will ask to be posted by both the Rangers and Hal. Even if the other has already posted the link, I would appreciate it if both parties could do so in order to verify that they are identical, and resolve the issue if they are not. These links have specifically to do with the questions regarding the Bikeracks.
1. In relation to Article 9 - Persistent posting of objectionable content.
First, How many board members PMed or emailed you to object about your posts, how many multiple complaints there were, and how many board posted complaints there were?
Second, How many warnings, both in PM, email and out in the threads, did you receive before your Symposium permissions were revoked?
Third, once your permissions for the Symposium were revoked how many warnings, both in PM, email and out in the threads, did you recieve before you were limited to the Bikeracks?
Forth, as this is a member moderated board, how many and what warnings/complaints/comments did you receive through PM, Email or on the board itself other than from the poster you were in dispute with and other than Rangers?
2. In relation to Article 2, Members Rights and Responsibilities
Violation of the right for members to post free of disruptions caused by the personal disputes of others.
First, How many board members PMed or emailed you to object about the ongoing dispute between you and SF, how many multiple complaints there were, and how many board posted complaints there were?
3. In Relation to Article 2, Members Rights and Responsibilites
Violation to refrain from using PM capability to harass other members of the board
First, How many members recieving the PMs emailed, PMed or posted complaints to you about receiving the PM?
Second, Was a warning given to you, either on the board, by email or through PM before the PM privileges were revoked?
Third, what is the exact number of members who you PMed
4. In Relation to Article 5,]¶1: The Bike Racks Forum
First, a violation may have occured when threads were started in response to threads outside the Bikeracks Forum. How many of these threads did you start?
Were any of these threads started because of splitting action taken by the Rangers? If so, please link to those you did start, and those that were started by splitting, separating them into two categories listed as such.
Second, A violation of use may have occured when multiple threads dealing with the same issue were started.
How many of these threads did you start?
Were any of these threads started because of splitting action taken by the Rangers? If so, please link to those you did start, and those that were started by splitting, separating them into two categories listed as such.
Third, a violation of use may have occured when multiple threads were started that did not involve resolution of disputes.
How many of these threads did you start?
Were any of these threads started because of splitting action taken by the Rangers? If so, please link to those you did start, and those that were started by splitting, separating them into two categories listed as such.
Forth, Did you recieve a warning, either on the board, by email or through PM before posting privileges were revoked?
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
A number of questions for the Board Membership as a whole:
These questions are for the board Membership only. Board members may respond via PM to the jurors. These will all be Yes or No questions.
Rangers and Hal, The set of questions for you is above. Please do not comment these questions.
These questions are for information gathering purposes only.
1. In relation to Article 9 - Persistent posting of objectionable content.
First, Did you feel that this violation occured?
Second, Would you be willing to be called as a witness to your answer, whether it be yes or no, in the Hearing thread?
Third, If you did post a warning or complaint on the board in regard to this, and you are willing to be called as a witness, can you come prepared with links to your posts?
Forth, Did you PM or email the Rangers with a complaint, and if so, would you be willing for the fact that you did so to become public?
2. In relation to Article 2, Members Rights and Responsibilities
Violation of the right for members to post free of disruptions caused by the personal disputes of others.
First, Did you feel that this violation occured?
Second, Would you be willing to be called as a witness to your answer, whether it be yes or no, in the Hearing thread?
Third, If you did post a warning or complaint on the board in regard to this, and you are willing to be called as a witness, can you come prepared with links to your posts?
Forth, Did you PM or email the Rangers with a complaint, and if so, would you be willing for the fact that you did so to become public?
3. In Relation to Article 2, Members Rights and Responsibilites
Violation to refrain from using PM capability to harass other members of the board
First, Did you feel that this violation occured?
Second, Would you be willing to be called as a witness to your answer, whether it be yes or no, in the Hearing thread?
Third, If you did post a warning or complaint on the board in regard to this, and you are willing to be called as a witness, can you come prepared with links to your posts?
Forth, Did you PM or email the Rangers with a complaint, and if so, would you be willing for the fact that you did so to become public?
4. In Relation to Article 5,]¶1: The Bike Racks Forum
First, a violation may have occured when threads were started in response to threads outside the Bikeracks Forum.
- First, Did you feel that this violation occured?
Second, Would you be willing to be called as a witness to your answer, whether it be yes or no, in the Hearing thread?
Third, If you did post a warning or complaint on the board in regard to this, and you are willing to be called as a witness, can you come prepared with links to your posts?
Forth, Did you PM or email the Rangers with a complaint, and if so, would you be willing for the fact that you did so to become public?
Second, A violation of use may have occured when multiple threads dealing with the same issue were started.
- First, Did you feel that this violation occured?
Second, Would you be willing to be called as a witness to your answer, whether it be yes or no, in the Hearing thread?
Third, If you did post a warning or complaint on the board in regard to this, and you are willing to be called as a witness, can you come prepared with links to your posts?
Forth, Did you PM or email the Rangers with a complaint, and if so, would you be willing for the fact that you did so to become public?
Third, a violation of use may have occured when multiple threads were started that did not involve resolution of disputes.
- First, Did you feel that this violation occured?
Second, Would you be willing to be called as a witness to your answer, whether it be yes or no, in the Hearing thread?
Third, If you did post a warning or complaint on the board in regard to this, and you are willing to be called as a witness, can you come prepared with links to your posts?
Forth, Did you PM or email the Rangers with a complaint, and if so, would you be willing for the fact that you did so to become public?
PLEASE NOTE:
Any answers given by people who are not willing to be witnesses will not be taken into account.
If you know for sure that you are not willing to be a witness, either for Hal or against him, then please do not bother answering these questions.