From: Hermit (virus@hermit.net)
Date: Tue Oct 07 2003 - 17:27:06 MDT
[Hermit 2] As a general comment, I think that Jonathan Davis has still not got the point made both in the Disciplinary Process document and the introduction, so pardon me if I repeat it. This is not a "legal" process. It is a dialog. All of the measures raised belong quite properly in, and would be appropriate to a "legal" process. As would manuals full of rules, lawyers, prosecutors, defense attorneys, bailiffs, bailbondsmen, appeal courts, etc. etc. Aside from Jonathan Davis, who seems to want this for a process which should, I hope, be seldom required, I'm hoping nobody else wants to go down this path.
[Hermit 2] Let me try to respond to his questions anyway.
[Jonathan Davis 1] 1. Defeasibility/Corrigibility. Please can we make it a clear that any process is subject to review and reconstitution. Perhaps we ought to build in fixed review points on all policies to make sure they are achieving their aims. These processes, like all laws, must be subject to repeal and review.
[Hermit 2] There is already a "repeal" system defined in the Wiki. We are an evolutionary organization and the emergent systems we are engaged in developing reflect this.
[Jonathan Davis 1] 2. Scale/proportion. Please can there be some discussion about how we might measure the scale of an offence or whether it is worthy of activating the disciplinary process. I see a danger of the process being abused through trivial demands for action where it is not warranted.
[Hermit 2] Any complaint has to pass through a dual process of:
Initial review by the Council before establishing a Reconciliation Commitee.
Review by the Reconciliation Commitee.
[Hermit] Any complaint which does not in the opinion of the Council require action will be closed off there unless the complainant is left unsatisfied with that resolution, in which case a reconciliation committee will be appointed anyway. Any complaint forwarded to a Reconciliation Committee will lead to a dialog with one or more parties, who will resolve the situation and if they consider it necessary may lead to other actions as laid down. Invalid claims will be dealt with similarly, in dialog, in order to resolve the situation.
[Hermit 2] The record of any disciplinary action is dealt with via a private BBS channel. This serves to provide a record for review by the council.
[Hermit 2] The point being that unless the Council and Reconciliation Commitees take appropriate action to achieve resolution when a complaint is made, that leads to the permanent settlement of the issues raised, the likelihood is that the same people and issues will continue to play out in and on our forums. Which is exactly what the process is designed to avoid, Again, this is not a legal process. Discarding dissatisfaction as not significant enough or worthy enough of activating the process is exactly the wrong way to procede. And it is probably worth reminding everyone that the Reconsiliation Commitees have the ability to resolve issues with complainants too. And if needed, will. At the end of the day, we don't seek "justice", we seek useable and attractive forums.
---- This message was posted by Hermit to the Virus 2003 board on Church of Virus BBS. <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=54;action=display;threadid=29470> --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Oct 07 2003 - 17:27:14 MDT