Org Disciplinary Proceedings

[Dionysus9]

The present discord at the .org is really bothering me and I think something needs to be done. In an effort to do something constructive instead of simply complain, I offer the following proposal:

.Org Disciplinary Proceedings:

A new forum for Discipline should exist. Any disciplinary action must be made public (even a warning). Any moderator has the power to initiate a disciplinary proceeding by posting the following information in a topic in the discipline forum:

1) State the member who is subject to discipline
2) State the rule that was allegedly broken
2) State the conduct that broke the rule
3) State the recommended punishment and duration.

If the punishment consists of a simple warning, then the moderator may issue the warning himself without further proceedings.

If the punishment consists of anything greater than a warning, the moderator must initiate a more formal proceeding--call for a council. The moderator then becomes the "Prosecutor." If the prosecutor recomends a ban (for any length of time), he may immediately suspend the defendant's posting rights until the council has issued a decision.

To initiate a council hearing, the prosecutor will make the 4 statments (member, rule, conduct, recommended punishment), as well as a 5th statement calling for a council. The council shall be composed of 3 .org moderators (other than the prosecutor) and a new topic shall be opened for a hearing by the head of the council.

At the hearing the prosecutor will present his case for banning. The accused/defendant shall have a chance to tell his side of the story. Other witnesses will be allowed to testify only at the discretion of the council. The council will then issue a decision.

After the hearing the other 3 moderators (council) will make a post which states their findings:
1) Member's conduct did/did not break a rule;
2) punishment/duration





This strikes a balance between the need for expediency and swift justice and also the need for public involvement in (or at least view of) the proceedings. It imposes only a small additional duty upon moderators but ensures that there is some consensus when justice is handed down.

I hope this will be considered as an option.

Oh, and there should be a procedure for normal .org patrons to file a grievance against other patrons. The grievance will be reviewed by a moderator and that mod will decide whether to initiate discipline.

Comments, please.

[tootee]

My comment - this is for WatchTower (.org policy recommendation and such)

All kindly proceed to WatchTower to continue this thread. Thanks.

Thread moved.

[LittleGrizzly]

hmm process seems a bit too long winded for me but i do want more than a number and a word to tell people they're banned.......

[Dionysus9]

well this is just a suggestion, and the process need not take very long. It would go something like this:


Tootee posts:

1) MasterBachus
2) is accused of threatening violence on an .org member
3) because he threatened to "come to your house and make you pay"
4) I recommend he be suspended for 6 months
5) and I call a council to make the determination.

Then a council of 3 mods is somehow chosen (alphabetical order?). Tootee presents his evidence, the council lets MasterBachus make a statement in his defense. If the council wants more info they can allow witnesses, but dont have to. Then the council posts:

1) MasterBachus is found guilty of threatining violence against another org member
3) His punishment shall be a 3 month suspension.

This whole process can take as little as 3-4 posts in a discipline topic.

The bottom line-- there would be a process, not just a snap decision made by a single person.

Edit: Thank you Tootee for posting this here, I really appreciate it I want to stop complaining and start acting and you are helping me do that, thanks again.

[Skomatth]

The one reason for banning

Insulting a members race, ethnicity, gender, religion, orientation, ability, or opinions. (forget something?)

The mod quotes when this was done and gives a warning. Should the member do it again, he'll be banned. After the warning the member could defend himself by saying why his statement was not in violation and proving why. Should enough people support him the mod's common sense should make him remove the warning.

Off topics post are to be deleted by a mod and the member warned but nvr banned .

[Gregoshi]

Quote[/b] ]Oh, and there should be a procedure for normal .org patrons to file a grievance against other patrons. The grievance will be reviewed by a moderator and that mod will decide whether to initiate discipline.

Any patron can email or PM anyone on the staff and file such a grievance - whether against another patron or a staff member.

Some patrons actually do that. I know in my experience these affairs were dealt with quietly behind the scenes with no public embarrassment for the accused. When approached like this, most people are very agreeable, apologetic and comply with the request to change their objectionable behaviour. When accused in a public forum, they are often embarrassed and become defensive and hostile. This is especially true if the accusation is made by another patron ("you're not the boss of me "). That is why it is in everyone's best interest to let the Org staff deal with the situation. I know that is not a comforting thought for some of you in light of the high level of distrust you currently hold for us, but it really is the best way. We are regular people like you. Honest.

[Dionysus9]

I would add that threats of physical violence against another org member (made in an org post) could be grounds for banning.

Otherwise, I agree that a full suspension of .org rights for "petty name calling" and such is just too extreme.

[Skomatth]

Physical threats are subjective. Krast would be banned for lobbing heads off with his axe.

[Skomatth]

Depends on what you call "petty name calling". example?

[solypsist]

if someone is banned it is a private matter between that user and the org staff. there's no reason anyone else needs to have it explained to them or for the staff to try to "convince" other users to agree that the person deserved to be banned.
if a banned person decides to go public with his suspension then it should be done elsewhere. belligerent and/or repeated demands from users for explanations or attempts to twist situations that put Org staff in a defensive posture will result in a ban for that user.
the staff of the Org reserve the right to engage in these practices on a case by case basis.

[Dionysus9]

Hmm, well, I disagree with both the spirit and wisdom of such a policy, Solypsist. That is the type of reasoning used by dictators, not representatives. Perhaps thats my problem--I've not thought of the moderators as rulers, but as reprepsentatives. Perhaps I should change my paradigm.

We are not asking to be convinced, but only informed. If one of our community is exhiled, we want to know who, briefly why, for how long, and we'd like to have some guarantee that more than 1 mod took a look at the incident before sending an otherwise productive member out in the cold.

It's just not an unreasonable request, and if you think my comments put you in a defensive posture then I really do have something to worry about and even more reason to wave my arms and propose a change.

My question is: why are the moderators "on the defensive"? Nobody has personally attacked Tosa or said more than, essentially, "he made a mistake." We all make mistakes and type things we regret-- why should our heads be on the chopping block because a mod in our forum has a bad day?

All we are asking for is a summary disciplinary proceeding. Hell, you can rubber stamp the bans, I dont care-- just report them as if they've been investigated, and give the accused a chance to speak in his defense, and I'll be happy. Anything short of a formal procedure gives the [/I]appearance of bias, whether or not such bias actually exists[I].

It is the appearance of bias/favoritism which is fostered by the current rules that bothers me. At least 2 mods should have to agree on a ban, dont you think?

How is that an attack on the mods? Why does that make the mods defensive? I dont understand.

[Catiline]

dionysus, mods don't ban, it's a n admin privilege. These things have to be discussed befoer they can happen, we simply can't do it ourselves.

[Dionysus9]

ok, I am using the wrong terminology then. Is Tosa the only admin? or are there others?

[KukriKhan]

See the staff hierarchy here:
http://www.totalwar.org/site/staff.shtml

plus a couple new mod's (haven't updated the page this month; will soon, I'm sure).

[Dionysus9]

Thank you very much Kukri, now I see. Tosa is the only Forum admin (and thats a very big job for 1, but he does very well 99% of the time).

It is an awfule lot of responsibility to be the only forum admin, and I can see that sometimes quick decisions are needed. But instantly banning long time members is going to be unpopular and scrutinized.

This NC banning (which its really a suspension, not a ban) has caused a lot of strife at the .org because some people think the punishment does not fit the crim and therefore they presume it is a personal retribution from tosa. I just think Tosa was fed up and acted out of frustration. I think Tosa made a mistake-- nothing that cant be fixed, but a mistake all the same. 1% of the time he makes a mistake and everyone jumps on him, well, thats unfair to tosa too.

But with no formal procedure other than tosa's opinion, people are going to be unhappy now and then. I think the admin should be able to suspend posting rights for a short time until a couple of mods can vote on a suspension. But giving the admin total unlimited discretion subjects him to an awful lot of "exposure".

It would cause less trouble among the patrons in the long run, and relieve tosa of much exposure.

It doesnt seem like many others are interested or concerned, so I'll shut up now. But I think it is worth considering.

Why does tosa always have to be the bad guy? He should be able to say "look the council decided."

[ELITEofGAZOZ]

I fully second what Bachus wrote.

[ErikJansen]

Uh ok.. I may be OT and considered trying to coup this thread but... well the other relevant threads have been LOCKED

Tosa Inu:

Quote[/b] ]Kocmoc, Magyar Khan, Monsta, your actings show repeated and structural
incomapatibility with the nature of this forum. The posting rights for these accounts will be lifted, until
each of you convinced me, by private e-mail, that you updated your act/nature and that you'll properly function in these forums. I also expect the e-mails to contain answers/replies to the above.

So does this mean u've banned the trio in question? Have you???

[Knight_Yellow]

i read somewhere else that yes thats what happened.


all they need to do is swallow some pride and say sorry.

*i have no idea why they where banned i didnt read any motives im not taking sides etc.*

[Papewaio]

Justice needs to be swift and seen to be done.

Committees are just a way of ducking responsibility and shuffling around. Ultimately an adult of some form has to say 'the buck stops here' and take responsibility for the actions.

A suspension would be a temporary thing. Also the patron, mods and admin all tend to discuss this. Even the patron has some email dialog typically.

I think it would be a far worse situation where it comes to having the mods and admin second guessed over every suspension. Banning is pretty harsh. But without the full context of the situation I will make no comment on the bans. Suspensions or downgrading to entrance hall etc is a case by case situation and leave it to the admin and mods to sort out.

Why? Because as mentioned 99% of the time this place is one of the most harmonious places to exist in. It is also a private club, and just because it is harmonious most of the time it is not because it is an experiment in a utopic democracy or a socialist paradigm. It is a benevolent dictatorship. If you haven't noticed by now most of the mods have been selected for 3 primary reasons:
1/ The ability to take a joke ie Robs Selma Picture.
2/ General helpfulness particularly to newbies ie Monkeyman.
3/ Relatively prolific posters/finger on the pulse, general awareness of the Org and what is happening ie Soly.

Patrons should self police themselves. They should act for the good of themselves and for the group. The main roleplaying on this board should be done with the samurai or chivalric ideals or those of Saladin. We should look to rule our own actions to that of what ideals we would like to be in everyday life.

Papewaio is only a shade of who I am in real life. We should bring the best of ourselves to this place. Those of us who continue to be belligerent and continue to ignore the rules of memebership that they agreed to when joining should rethink what they are doing here. This is a place to have fun, not someones entire life. I think some people do need a ban for their own good and peace of mind. Step back and get a grip on reality. Make sure this is not the greatest part of ones life but just an enjoyable and thought provoking environment. Where you can meet people from around the world and discuss things.

It is pretty cool though when you think about how much some people have emotionally invested into this community of text. So with that in mind suspensions and bans should not be lightly given or lightly received. If you get suspended maybe instead of pointing the finger, take a good look and see if you were being the best you could be.

All for one, one for all
MP for SP, SP for MP

[Demon of Light]

Quote[/b] (Dionysus9 @ June 05 2003,21:11)]It is an awfule lot of responsibility to be the only forum admin, and I can see that sometimes quick decisions are needed. But instantly banning long time members is going to be unpopular and scrutinized.

This NC banning (which its really a suspension, not a ban) has caused a lot of strife at the .org because some people think the punishment does not fit the crim and therefore they presume it is a personal retribution from tosa. I just think Tosa was fed up and acted out of frustration. I think Tosa made a mistake-- nothing that cant be fixed, but a mistake all the same. 1% of the time he makes a mistake and everyone jumps on him, well, thats unfair to tosa too.

As far as this being nothing that can't be fixed, Tosa banned Magyar Khan, Kocmoc, and Wolf Monsta earlier today. All were essentially booted for lese majeste. Ever hear the phrase "it's lonely at the top"? It is true. Magyar and Kocmoc at the very least forced Tosa's hand. Alot of claims were made by these two against Tosa that could not be ignored. If false, Tosa must expel them for besmirching his name. If true, Tosa must silence them before they can get any traction. Regardless of whether the claims are true or false, Magyar and Kocmoc entered into a conflict in which their enemy had all the power. They predictably lost but Tosa has been damaged in the process.

So here we are debating whether Tosa should be the sole arbiter of who can post and who cannot. Tosa is the one at the top and there is discussion as to whether he should at least in part be toppled. Should he? I say not. Though including Wolf Monsta in the banned list gives me pause, the fact is that neither you nor I nor anyone else knows the facts behind this matter. What I DO know is that Tosa is more persuasive in presenting his side of the story than his detractors are. In a world comprised only of uncertainties (tips hat to Descartes), Tosa's persuasiveness wins. It might not be fair for me to say it like that but fairness is entirely too subjective an idea to have ever been satisfied with anything else I could have said.

Which brings me to fairness. I think I'm fair. I believe myself to be more fair than Tosa. Know why? Because I speak from my own personal standpoint. I have my own (biased) ideas about fairness and they must of necessity differ from Tosa’s (as they would differ from Kukri’s or Dionysius). We judge a person’s fairness by how closely it matches our own paradigm. The more a person agrees with us, the more impartial we believe that person to be. So some people here believe that supplanting Tosa or stripping him of some of his powers will result in more fairness? Get a committee to decide what Tosa already decides now and you’ll still not get any closer to the goal unless the members of the committee think as you do.

In any event, all talk of change is entirely dependant on Tosa’s willingness to relinquish some of the power he holds. Nothing short of a groundswell of support for change would have a chance of ensuring any action from Tosa. (there is the chance though that he is so tired of dealing with this crap that he’d happily delegate a few things&#8230

[Tera]

The Forum Admin shouldn't be an absolute ruler who decides everything by himself. And I know Tosa isn't like that. Yet, a forum admin isn't entrusted with such position for nothing - he is needed to make important, occasional swift decisions, especially in times of crisis. There just isn't time for discussion and debate sometimes.

In my opinion, we're now facing one of those structural crises...some reforms are necessary to re-gain trust and support in the system. This can translate itself in a change of rules, a change of admin and so on. A constructive debate for the future is needed. Forget the past. Let's discuss. The ORG belongs to the community, after all.

Tera

[Lord Of Storms]

I wont pretend to know whats going on in the Jousting fields or in the MP world , But I do know that to Admin a site like this is no small task and the people who do these jobs are volunteers and when we all signed on we should have at some time read the rules and regulations and if you accepted them then there is nothing to question nothing to change. I do not knnow the people involved nor will I pretend to know what they allegedly did or did not do. But it simply comes down to you either accept the rules as they stand and deal with the discipline as it is dealt out or leave if you dont like it thats all.

[ELITEofGAZOZ]

I often read these two statements:


To users arguments:
Org is not that important like real life. Dont invest so much time and effort in it.

About moderators/administrators:
Managing this forum is a hard tough job and they invest so much time and effort in it, just to serve for the community.





In another words.

If I write: "Point A is a problem in the ORG and must be solved."
(Then I waste my time just for having fun and ignore all my real life issues, I am ill).

And if the moderator replies: "No, point A is not a problem in the ORG."
(Then he works hard and must spent again so much time and effort to serve for the community, he rewards respect).

Guys, stop this bullshit statements about REAL LIFE and HARD WORK IN ORG My MOM and my DAD are real life and they dont even know that there is an org. They can blame me. But dont explain me with 1000 words in your org posts that there is a real life outside the org. Dont tell me, that users, who care about the org, are NOT WORKING
GAH

[Nelson]

I normally would not get involved in this sort of discussion but TosaInu is a very good man who I have known here since his days of creating maps for us to use when the Shogun demo was all we had to play. Tosa is not damaged. He is correct in dealing with those Org patrons who consistently evidence rude, quarrelsome, brooding behavior. I support his stance. We do not need a Supreme Court to handle discipline, with opinions and dissents etc. Such a thing would be too slow and ponderous anyway. When action must be taken it must be swift and decisive regardless of who agrees.

No one has to be a member of the Org. Our presence is a privilege not a right. Nor are we all equal. The mods and admins have been very permissive. They should all be canonized for putting up with grief.

We all should have at the very least one thing in common. We should all enjoy Total War. We all don’t seem to however and IMO therein lays the problem.

The reason for most of the offensive behavior that I have seen is that some people really do need to move on. There are patrons who are disenchanted with the game and bitch about it more or less constantly because it isn’t exactly what they want. They have a complete litany: TW has diminished since Shogun. It isn’t balanced. Others don’t play properly/my way/the “honorable” way. Noobs ruin everything. The devs are all untrustworthy marketing tools who only show up to hype the game. Nobody listens to us. And on and on. I’m not saying that people shouldn’t be free to criticize aspects of the game or that everyone must be a total fan boy. But everyone should basically like the damn game and enjoy playing it Bitterly rehashing the very same grievances for years is silly. If Total War isn’t a pleasant entertainment experience for some then they should leave. That’s all. Pick up and go. Anyone who spends most of their time bellyaching and who instead elects to become embroiled in one ugly disturbance after another, the whole Tera thing, the Darkmoor Dragon pile-on, sniping at devs, etc., either through transparent innuendo or gross rudeness, should deservedly get the boot. These dismissals were a long time coming IMO. “repeated and structural incompatibility with the nature of this forum” is an appropriate description of the pattern of postings these guys have established over a long period. This opinion of mine is cold blooded, impersonal and based exclusively on what has been posted for all to see. I don’t play MP much at all so I never much bothered about what goes on in those forums. But I do care when hard working people like Tosa come under fire for what I believe was a righteous act.

If the time ever comes that I don’t like the Total War series, should I find myself expecting to dislike the next installment before it even appears, THAT will be my last day here.

For your efforts at trying to keep the Org a pleasant extension to my PC gaming hobby,

domo arigato gozaimas, TosaInu-dono.

[Lord Of Storms]

Quote[/b] ]Guys, stop this bullshit statements about REAL LIFE and HARD WORK IN ORG My MOM and my DAD are real life and they dont even know that there is an org. They can blame me. But dont explain me with 1000 words in your org posts that there is a real life outside the org. Dont tell me, that users, who care about the org, are NOT WORKING
GAH

Edited by ELITEofGAZOZ on June 06 2003,18:37

I agree with you ELITEofGAZOZ those who say you cannot form a bond or make a friend with someone just because they are sitting at a PC maybe a few thousand miles away are just narrow minded , I have made some close ties here with a few people we e-mail regularly talk about our families share good times and bad alike, I was really glad to see clans like Lrossa actually getting together to meet in person and I have heard of others coming from all over to meet personally and share there interests this is the best proof when I saw the Pics of the Lrossa meeting I could see that these are not just faceless names behind a computer terminal, these were friends sharing a good time.A positive note that the community needs right now

[ichi]

To the Moderators and Members of The Org:

With responsibility must come authority. Therefore, I cannot support a committee or review board for the moderator's decisions. They do work hard, for free, and have done much to keep The Org a decent, fun place. We need to support them.

I do not know the specifics or history of this incident, but I trust the moderators to 'do the right thing'.

However . . .

When I first joined Gregoshi made me (informally) Chief Sniffer; my task was to lurk about and raise issues with how The Org is managed. I have been around for half a year and have not 'jumped in' on anything (except a little fracas about French-bashing, best forgotten).

Perhaps it's me (raised in the Amercian West, rather independent and wary of authority), but I detected some attitudes during this episode.

The attitude that you can leave if you don't like it.

That raising issues or voicing concerns is whining.

That run-of-the-mill members don't have any say in how this forum feels.

That this is not a democracy (may be true, but is irrelevant). This is, or should/can be, a community. In a community of friends we would not say things like what has been said.

Our (simple members) interest and concerns should never be misconstrued as rebellion or whining. Members should never be kept out of the dialogue of our community. No one should be put down, kept in their place, whatever, based on their status as a noob, clanmember, moderator, or whatever.

Ownership in the community makes it stronger. Lack of ownership makes it weaker. I feel like I have some ownership here. If I'm wrong, please let me know, and I'll rethink it all.

aregato to all who make this a great place.

respectfully,

ichi

[Lehesu]

I don't take this forum quite as seriously as others, as some of my posts might suggest, but I tend to side with the administration and the moderators in the Org. They are the ones who really get the work done. I do not think that the Org is a "country" per se, and some of the abstract thoughts of "democracy" are lost on me. This is a benevolent dictatorship, like it or not. If you disagree about a policy, and the admins/mods fail to see your reasoning, well, too bad. Just leave. It is just a gaming forum, no use fighting bitterly over it.

[Gregoshi]

What is a "Chief Sniffer"?

[Obex]

Damn it Gregoshi, i was gunning for chief sniffer What the hell? I work hard, try to post on topic (this being a regretable exception), and what thanks do i get? Nothing. No sniffing responsibilities at all. I think the system should work like this:

1) Obex
2) is accused of stinking up this thread
3) because he wants to move past the mp clique/omnipotent mods drama.
4) I recommend he be suspended for 2 weeks, which will prevent him from posting on Soly's babe thread. He can still play the game, which is the reason for this site in the first place;
5) and I call a council to make the determination, headed up by the chief sniffer, with vice sniffer taking notes.

[Lehesu]

I second that motion.