Troll Kingdom

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

EI Guideline Vote

Indeed Gode...

I happen to think indefinite suspensions are just another word for ban myself. Just much prettier and easier to swallow.

How is that last e-mail to the admins going over btw? :P
 
Una Salus Lillius said:
I third HF and A Karas.

But I seem to remember that brackets have a somewhat different meaning here at TK than they have in other message boards I've joined so I think I'll let discretion guide me for the time being.

Lil

{{{{{{{Lil}}}}}}}}}

-That's okay. :)

){

-That's not okay. :D
 
Godeskian said:
Not the first time in recent weeks I've come face to face with my old comments, and not for the first time I find myself doing some serious soul-searching regarding them.

Hey Lil

Soul searching is good for you Gode. I had to go back and read my original comments too. Then I had to shoot off an apology to someone for having my head up my ass. I was on the fence way too much.

Gode, we all grow. Sometimes we grow away from our ideals. Sometimes we grow into them. Sometimes we just change. There's no harm in that.

What is good is to reflect on it. So you're doing good hon.
 
HeroicFool said:
Indeed Gode...

I happen to think indefinite suspensions are just another word for ban myself. Just much prettier and easier to swallow.

I'm also not quite the same person I was back then, though I occasionally miss being an idealist rather than a pragmatist.

How is that last e-mail to the admins going over btw? :P

I don't know yet. I'll find out.
 
Godeskian said:
Not the first time in recent weeks I've come face to face with my old comments, and not for the first time I find myself doing some serious soul-searching regarding them.

Hey Lil

I've been doing a whole lot of soul searching this whole weekend. And, you know, this whole internet stuff isn't worth the bullshit. If people can't be honest with one another, then screw em. I'm not going to tolerate that kind of BS. If the attitude of EI staff is "take it or leave it", "If you don't like it, go", "Be good little members, and everything will be alright", then fuck that board. I'm sick of it. I will NOT be treated like shit, nor will I feel like I am treated like shit. How dare they shove things down people's throats. How dare they let asswipes like Waterpisser, and Rhea get away with so much shit, and then turn around and fuck other people over with a vengeance. You call that democratic? You call that fair? Nope. Not a chance in hell. Ei is NOTHING what it once was. I don't know how or when this happened, but it is evident now more than ever before.
 
Caitriona said:
Soul searching is good for you Gode. I had to go back and read my original comments too. Then I had to shoot off an apology to someone for having my head up my ass. I was on the fence way too much.

Gode, we all grow. Sometimes we grow away from our ideals. Sometimes we grow into them. Sometimes we just change. There's no harm in that.

What is good is to reflect on it. So you're doing good hon.

I've never been much for reflecting on the past, because on balance i'd rather be looking to the future, but lord was I green back then. Plus arrogant, somewhat overbearing and way to prone to jumping straight past conclusions.

I like to think i've mellowed somewhat with age.
 
Una Salus Lillius said:
I third HF and A Karas.

But I seem to remember that brackets have a somewhat different meaning here at TK than they have in other message boards I've joined so I think I'll let discretion guide me for the time being.

Lil

We are categorically not huggers here, but then no one listens to me.

We even have a hug thread in the Tea Room. It's disgusting. We have a reputation to maintain. We can't be seen hugging for crying out loud.

;)
 
A Karas said:
I've been doing a whole lot of soul searching this whole weekend.

Well for me what has happened is this: I don't have the energy for too many battles. The ones I do think are worth fighting (to a point, and with the current battle, that point is looming closer) I have sort of deal with the fact that in the end it's not my call.

But it sure would be a shame to see a place like ExIsle become the very thing that engendered its creation. That's sure where it's heading and it's too too bad.

Lil
 
Heh Banapis has thrown even more guidelines into the ring.

Upon first glance, the only part I actually like is his staff oath of office. I don't at all care for the laundry list of offenses that will warrant an automatic "indefinite suspension". (ie ban)

STAFF OATH OF OFFICE

I, [insert name], do solemnly pledge to uphold the ExIsle Community Charter and enforce the Posting Guidelines without undue prejudice against any member. Nor will I publicly post disparaging remarks about any ExIsle member anywhere on the internet.

At all times I will strive to be fair and impartial in my decisions, and when I feel my judgment might be clouded I will refer the matter to other Moderators or Administrators. If a decision calls for an interpretation of a member’s intent, I will fully consider the context and circumstances and not rush to judgment.

While performing my duties I shall remain cognizant of the importance of free speech and will seek to avoid excessively infringing on freedom of expression or shutting down spirited debate.

I am also fully aware that because of the responsibility my position entails, I will be held accountable for my words and will be held to them, more so than the average poster.

This, however, I can get behind. ;)
 
One change I would make to this is to strike the word publicly from the first paragragh.

There shouldn't be any of this going on even behind closed doors if you want to be a mod.
 
I'd like it to be a politeness thing, rather than something we have to (have others) come out and say.

It really IS a courtesy... a fairly important one.

A Karas--don't give up yet? There is still that little bit of hope... ;)

edit: I did NOT come for the porn, dammit! :P
 
Caitriona said:
You know this accusation has been leveled a lot over the years, and I've come to a conclusion about it.

It's pure BS.

As I was telling my good friend Shal today as we were chatting about moderator ethics, the fact that a person talks one way on EI and a different way on TK, is more because EI has a damn "Be nice to each other" policy. WE HAVE to adjust our language there. We have to be nice or we are warned and suspended and banned. that's not being a hypocrite, that's following their damn rules.

We don't have those restrictions here, and so we can say what we would say there if they allowed it. That's also not hypocrisy that's adhering to community standards. something they should be thanking us for instead of accusing us of being hypocrites.

If you all on EI want people to be honest, don't muzzle them with "be nice all the time". If you want consistent behavior, don't dictate behavior so narrowly. But please stop trying to intimidate us with the "You're a hypocrite if you speak your mind on TK, because it is BS and it is outright intimidation to shut people up on a Free Speech forum.

Now are there some people who are outrageously nice on EI and come back here to just carry on and laugh? Sure. But there are just as many people waiting ot go into a thread on EI and laugh at another person's ban. Thy hypocrisy runs bot ways in the extreme cases.

For the most part, I can't even imagine how my good friend Shal could accuse me of being nice on EI and slamming people on TK. According to popular opinion I'm mean on EI too.

See. I'm consistent. ;)

Anyway Kam, I know what you are talking about, but that's the party EI line making us squirm so we are afraid to speak out. It's not hypocrisy if we can't say it or be heard on EI. That's why TK exists. Not to laugh at others, [well ok we laugh too], but to say things that can't be said on a board because of their crazy rules.

We get called hypocrites for following their rules. Makes me laugh every time I think about it. Course my good friend Shal, hasn't responded to my realization yet. I wonder what she'll think?

Found it... was looking in the wrong thread. ;)

I personally will probably remain on the fence about this for a while, because I have almost universally held myself to a high standard with regard to speaking about Ex Isle... when I was a watchdog, as a member, and in my own LJ... knowing that they could be read years down the road, and especially in the SL, when/if it got hacked, that I could and would be held responsible if anything got by that shouldn't have, if anyone was left to remember why I was there in the first place.

For example--I've been talking about HF's ban, yours, and the vote here because I can just speak straightforwardly here without being accused of the usual stuff...

Although given that the vote is presently 43-29 it's not exactly a tiny little minority screaming their heads off about losing rights this time. :P (Except I'm surprised at how the 'Texas law' thing has gotten so much attention... I suppose that's what people are familiar with.)
 
Anakam said:
I'd like it to be a politeness thing, rather than something we have to (have others) come out and say.

It really IS a courtesy... a fairly important one.

A Karas--don't give up yet? There is still that little bit of hope... ;)

edit: I did NOT come for the porn, dammit! :P


Well... yes and no...

That's how things were left after the thread in which I pulled all those quotes...

We all see how much good that did. Shal was there for that thread, she was a subject of it and yet she still did what she did.

Now we have people pointing at the guidelines and saying, "Hey she didn't break any rules, leave her alone".

Sorry, that shit doesn't fly anymore.
 
Oh and we all know that you did come for the porn. ;)

You can change that title in the user CP anytime you want to Anakam. :D
 
I miss title changes. :(

RobL--ask and ye shall receive... I don't know if it is *worth* posting it on EI, though.... I really don't.

Welcome to the new Guidelines:

We feel this is everything that we as Staff and the vast majority of the Members have asked for, e.g. shorter guidelines, more moderator discretion, and plainer language. The Guidelines have been simplified and streamlined from six pages to three pages.

While I'm one of those wanting shorter guidelines (which constitutes the majority of Ex Isle at this point, I would think), I think you cut out some rather important stuff in the process.

Feel free to make comments, questions, and suggestions. Most of the answers that are given will be used to create a "Staff Lounge guide to the GL" for use by all Staff. This will help ensure that everyone is on the same page and should help avoid some of the problems that have arisen in the past concerning lack of consistency with Staff changeovers as well as detailing internal processes that do not need to be in the Guidelines themselves. Please keep in mind that every post is different and there is no way that our judgment and discretion will produce absolutely uniform results.

I can understand that, and I can even understand that one particular thing means *all of this*, as long as we mostly really do. There is nothing wrong with precedent and community understanding, as long as such things are pointed out civilly when people who weren't there or didn't know, etc are confused.

As far as the moderating goes.... Well.. We are changing the way things are moderated by taking a step diagonally.... We will try using PM's and cool-its in thread (both personalized and more general) as unofficial warnings to give people a better idea of where the line is drawn, and then warning if they keep up the behavior. Also, the plan is to allow more discourse and that means more generalizations (to an extent), i.e. we plan to try and not sweat the small stuff too much and concentrate on the big stuff. Expect more proactive moderation with this approach with more cool-its before things get out of hand, and please listen when we ask you to back off. If something is clearly warnable, it will be warned as normal.

I'd suggest not being afraid to make the thread cool-its have names named--see my earlier post in response to Mark. Also, two-level cool-its might help... or they might just go back to 'sweating the small stuff'. It's hard to tell until things are implemented.

Also, if baiting results in a warning, would you please at least tell the provoking individual that next time they do that (to anyone), they will get a warning? I can see this going back to the small stuff and obviously it'd be good if we could all control ourselves, but such behavior REALLY is not okay.

If a poster has to ask, "am I too close to the line", then they probably are over the line of normal discourse, but might not be up to the level of a warnable offense. This does not mean that a poster can ride that fine line continuously without consequences.

Without wanting to seem provoking myself, I will remember this, because I have been seeing line-riding a LOT. I don't know if it's a good idea or not, but now that you've said it... and before the inevitable 'you should have PM'd someone'... I will just say I was taking a break, and getting into the seemingly endless 'that's provoking' 'no it's not' seemed too stressful.

Am I getting contradictory yet? :)

Our job as Moderators and Admins should be to encourage Members to think before they post and have the Members moderate themselves with little interference from Staff, with the Mods stepping in for official warnings only when necessary.

Theoretically, if the members listen to the Mods' advice to back off, then we should be handing out very few if any warnings.

I can deal with less warnings. However, I think there are better ways than the current guidelines to get people to think before they post. More encouragement from staff and members alike when there is apparently thoughtlessness, etc from someone rather than condemnation might do the trick, but that could be hard to accomplish.

These new Guidelines are an attempt to shorten, simplify, and introduce greater flexibility into the old Guidelines while maintaining much of the precedents that the staff set under the old rules. They should be taken as an evolution of the older set rather than a reset, and in order to be successful, will need the cooperation of everyone who posts on this board regardless of your place or planet of origin.

IDIC? ;)

Without being overly snarky, I think the first few days of voting have proved that we're not all willing to abide by these guidelines, both in terms of actual vote count and in terms of percentage.

Final Notes:

Please be aware that the Guidelines are not set in stone. Each case is different, and may be subject to conditions not readily apparent to all posters. When warnings are issued, consideration is given not just to the specific offense, but also the member's prior actions and infractions. New rules may be added as circumstances dictate.

I hope the addition of new rules is also accompanied by a really good explanation when they are added suddenly. This is, respectfully, quite a big change, without even taking the guidelines changes into account.

There will be no separate discussion period for this Guideline Ratification; it is a straight Yay/Nay vote. Both the Staff and Rov approve these guidelines on our end. The current bloated version of the Guidelines is partially the result of an 'amend as we go' ratification process. That is why we are asking for a straight up/down vote on this document. Certainly if its major principles seem wrong-headed to you, you should not vote for them. On the other hand, mere matters of phrasing or rhetoric should not make you vote against them. If you still have problems with them after a couple months in operation they can be altered via the polling process.

As we can all see by now, more than a small minority minds the lack of discussion period beforehand--and I truly, truly feel that it runs contrary to Ex Isle's foundations, at a time when the membership was pretty clearly (at least to my mind) showing that we wanted to make the guidelines shorter. What suggestions for making it ever shorter, what spirit of cooperation, might have emerged from such a discussion will never now be known.

Is the couple months still valid given how many people have voted no? Please don't tell me a majority is a majority--I think the fact that people are voting against the guidelines in truly record numbers is something that should be taken into account.

The voting period will be open for seven days. Members belonging to any group with full posting and PM privileges (e.g. Islander 2.0 but not Islanders) are eligible to vote. If you have questions, please ask them before you vote. If this Ratification fails, the Staff will go back and look at your suggestions and see what can be done to implement or correct them before presenting the GL for another Vote. If the GL pass, I personally would ask that you give time to allow them to start working for you before proposing changes in AQG.

Thanks,

Corwin

I already commented on the 7 day voting period, but I just wanted to emphasize again my feelings that whatever the length, we are still abruptly in a binding vote.


Guidelines 6-25-2006

See, you could have given us the draft then and let us argue. ;) (What? I hadn't said anything even remotely funny yet.)

Ex Isle Mission:
Ex Isle exists to provide a place for science fiction and fantasy fans to engage in civil discussion in their areas of interest, including science fiction and fantasy in all media. Other topics include science, current events, creativity, general socializing and fun.

I've never had a problem with this part... except that it sometimes feels like there's more current events than sci-fi. :)

Part I:
A) Expected Member Behavior

1. All members will treat each other with respect and decency. Healthy disagreement is welcome, as long as criticisms are focused on the ideas being expressed rather than on the people expressing them. Responding to other posters with insulting or deliberately disruptive comments violates this spirit. Do not attack other posters because they differ from you. Hatefulness is not allowed.

I see you have baiting in the next section, but I wish you'd move it up to this part. It is more subtle and incredibly hurtful.

2. Do not bring disputes from real life or other boards to Ex Isle.

I think you may have actually shortened this one too much. I know this one has already been critiqued pretty extensively, but I wish you'd reconsider because as written is is extraordinarily insular. Furthermore, as this is written I would not feel comfortable even ribbing Peridot about taxes, as I did a few months ago in the Beach thread on tax day. 'Would not feel comfortable' in this situation means that this guideline would apply to that and since I really don't want a warning, I wouldn't do it next year, for example.

3. No public calling for the sanctioning of a member. If you have a dispute, take it to a Moderator or Admin.

May I suggest the plural, for perspective, etc?

4. Threats: Any post, PM, or other entry, which can be read as a threat against a member's or other's life or welfare is forbidden. We will consider all such threats to be real and actual, not satire or hyperbole, and act accordingly. Threats to the security of Ex Isle will be treated in the same manner.

Wow. 'Which can be read'???

People, people... gone are the days of the Tyrant/Trancer 'wars', or attacks of the Pooh, or hey, even tailspinning into the ceiling after these guidelines are passed. If someone unfamiliar with those read them, they would certainly read them as threats against another's welfare.

And I did not have to think long on this to think of those things, either. I did not have to think long at all.

If nothing else, could you have those be loosened in the RP/Backstage forum?

5. Criticism of public figures is allowed and an important component of discussions. Posters should make this criticism as constructive as possible so it can foster further discussion but threats of violence against public figures whether directed at that public figure or via proxy will not be tolerated.

I think this is pretty close to the old stuff while being shorter.

B) General Posting Rules

1. No Promoting illegal activity in any form (based on US and Texas state law).
2. Commercial advertising unrelated to the board is not allowed. The Staff will edit such posts without waiting for the member to do so. Please PM a Mod or Admin if you have a question about advertising.
3. No Obscene / Explicit content: Sexually graphic images and posts are strictly forbidden. Obscene imagery and content in the forums should be reported to the Staff via PM ASAP.
4. Vulgarity: Certain words are not allowed here at Ex Isle- if you must use them they must be masked. Here is the link to the current list. Staff has the right to edit, without first requesting an edit from the member; they will simply replace vowels with asterisks. Note that exclusion of certain vulgar terms/words does not mean that members are free to use them.
5. Proper Attribution: When quoting outside sources (e.g. news articles, web sites, Wiki entries etc.) members must provide links back to the original material. Due to copyright laws, entire articles must not be quoted -- even if the original article is unavailable online, in an inconvenient format (e.g. PDF) or behind a mandatory registration page. In addition hot linking images or stealing bandwidth from other sites is strictly forbidden. The staff has the right to edit and insert the required link without waiting for the member to do so.
6. Thread Hijacking/Spam: While natural thread drift is allowed, forcefully appropriating a thread for a discussion totally unrelated to the original purpose of said thread may be considered spam depending on the guidelines for that forum and the specific situation. Posting multiple replies to long disused threads for the purpose of "bumping" the threads can be considered spam and is not allowed.
7. Baiting: These are posts that are made with the aim of angering/provoking a heated response from a single person, or several, indirectly. The staff will attempt to head off these types of posts with friendly cool its and reminders to be civil whenever possible. Please contact a Mod or Admin if you think you are being baited and please do not respond in kind.
8. Spoilers: Members must use "Spoiler" labels in topics and/or spoiler spaces in posts if you are starting a thread that will contain specific plot related details for any book, film or episode of a show. If a member is posting in a thread that does not already contain a spoiler label and they wish to discuss spoilers, they must use spoiler space and/or the spoiler bb code in the post.
9. Members may edit posts up to 48 hours after the original post is made. After that, a request must be made to a Moderator or an Admin via PM.
10. Always check the posted forum guidelines for further clarification on how these guidelines are applied in a forum and for additional forum specific guidelines.

Not that I want to resurrect the arguments on spoilers, but I think that having that for *any* book, film, or episode is a bit too strong. I also think it might make some people's sigs against guidelines (not quite sure, though).

I have less concerns about these than I do about the first part, although like I said, I think baiting should be earlier on in the guidelines.

Part II: Warnings and Suspensions

Some infractions are enough to warrant immediate suspensions. These include, but are not limited to:
1. Posting pornography or other obscene materials, stories or situations.
2. Posting anything libelous about or threatening specific harm to another poster.
3. Posting anything that violates Ex Isle's terms of service agreement.
4. Posting anything promoting illegal activities, or linking to sites which promote such activities: this includes but is not limited to cracking ("hacking"), phreaking, warez, and pyramid schemes.
5. Posting content advertising commercial services unrelated to board matters.
6. Engaging in or promoting any activities which attempt to attack or compromise Ex Isle's security and/or gain unauthorized access to secured sections.
7. Spamming by posting the same content repeatedly to multiple threads in a manner that disrupts communication. Multiple threads and/or posts questioning staff decisions, particularly in more than one forum, can also be treated as spam.
8. Posting something obviously hateful, such as addressing another poster by use of a racial, religious or ethnic slur or impugning their sexual orientation.
9. Repeated refusal to cooperate with the moderators on matters of possible illegal content, inflammatory remarks, or other board guidelines.
10. Duals and proxies: The use of dual identities or proxies for registration/primary use without admin approval is forbidden on Ex Isle. Using, registering, or attempting to register duals will be grounds for suspension of all user names.

Since duals are entirely forbidden, at least to my knowledge, I hope there wouldn't be admin approval of them. :)

Are these for triggering indefinite suspensions, in general? I know they've been in the guidelines for a while, but I was just wondering, as long as I'm here.

Warnings:

The staff will issue warnings based on both the letter and spirit of the Guidelines. We strive to be as lenient as possible and as strict as necessary, so please cooperate with the Staff when requested to do so. When possible, the Staff will issue Unofficial Warnings publicly in threads or by PM to specific members. Failure to abide by these requests can lead to Formal Warnings. Warnings are applied board wide.

Let me see if I have the scale right:

Cool-its (in thread and PM) THEN
Unofficial Warnings THEN
Formal Warnings

And will the number of unofficial warnings someone has, even if they have no formal warnings, have a cumulative bearing or something similiar when a first formal warning (actual or after another one has expired) is being considered?

3 Warnings = 1 week suspension
5 Warnings = 2 week suspension (this means that after a suspension, a 2nd warning will earn another suspension.)
7 Warnings = 1 month suspension
9 Warnings = 3 months suspension

Warnings will be issued in the specific forum in which they are earned and a notification PM’d to that member. Members will always be informed of suspensions in the AQG forum and the suspended member will be emailed. Warnings may be appealed to the staff in AQG or using the PM system. The only person who can start the appeal is the member who was warned. Members who are suspended may make an appeal to [email protected] .

I do have a concern with who can start the appeal--I would prefer that unless the warnee says they don't want an appeal (or further clarification for that matter, which is where this could very easily go) someone can start it, unless they are violating the other guidelines, in a thread or in the email to the admins.

In my admittedly liberal opinion, if a clarification that leads to a discussion also leads to a serious look at the warning and an appropriate retraction, then having those is absolutely worth it. Because warnings (and suspensions) really should be infrequent. Maybe this won't even come up with the efforts to rearrange things to give less warnings.

The Staff retains the right to further extend the suspension length after the 3 month period.

O_o

This is extending a three month suspension to four months, etc, right?

Might I recommend ending the three-month suspension as normal, with the condition that if they don't behave they do risk having the suspension enacted again?

When dealing with members who have no suspensions on their record, the staff will look back over the past six months to determine the member's number of previous warnings. For members who have incurred any suspensions in the past year a period of one year will be used to determine the number of warnings the member has when considering suspensions. In cases where an immediate suspension is warranted, the Staff may impose an indefinite suspension to allow the Staff time to discuss the issue before assigning punishment. The AQG thread will be updated after the decision is made.

I worry, as has been brought up sometime in the past (this year, I think), that six months and a year may be too long.

Perma Bans: When a poster's behavior is consistently disruptive to the board and the poster has failed to contribute substantively to civil discussion, the administrators have the option of enacting a permanent ban. The staff can also choose to enact this option after a member has accrued three suspensions and has made no effort to modify the behaviors that garnered the suspensions. Any new member who appears simply to spam, harass, or post pornography may be permanently banned without intermediate suspensions. A member sanctioned by the permanent ban shall have the right to make one appeal of the ban to the administrators. The appeal can be made no less than 30 days after the ban, and must be sent by email only to [email protected] by the person who was banned.

I have a wording suggestion, which in no way changes the actual meaning: "The appeal can be made at least 30 days after the ban". Or "30 days must pass before an appeal can be made" and go on from there. I work in math, I work with math students, and 'no less than' is not only rarely used, even we consider it overcomplicated. Also, the fact that a very wide variety of people participate here should be taken into account. I would really urge you to use the more straightforward wording.

My issues with the permaban policy, at least for anything except the spam/harass/porn offenses, are too many to name and have been well enumerated by others. In the interest of not getting sidetracked, I'll leave it at that.

Part III: Moderator and Administrator Guidelines

Moderators have wide discretion over their assigned forums, but shall moderate within the scope of the Guidelines.
1. Intent is difficult to prove over the Internet, so the Staff will work under their best assumptions.
2. The Staff will strive to be fair and impartial in every situation.
3. The Staff will normally not edit posts without the poster's consent (except for matters such as adding spoiler space or editing of words on the profanity list) unless they must because pornography or other such malice is present, or made to keep quoted articles within the fair use guideline.
4. The Staff will not lock or delete threads, except in the case of duplicate threads, threads that violate the Board Guidelines or Forum Policy, or other special circumstances, which will be explained in AQG if they arise. Threads may be moved to a more appropriate forum without warning.
5. Announcements regarding Suspensions and Board Changes will be made to the Announcements, Questions, and Gripes Forum (AQG) within 24 hours of the indicated action.
6. The Staff has the option of warning for violations up to 1 week after a post is made. Any post involving a violation of the TOS will be exempt from this timeline. Any discussions about possible violations/warnings should be made and announced within this timeline.

I have the same concerns and issues with 6 as others have said. If you are going for less warnings, the cases requiring warnings should be more clearcut, and thus require less time. (At the least, could this be considered on probation and brought up again after a one-month trial period, to see how often the week is actually needed.)

I also think that allowing 12 hours to make announcements rather than 24 is reasonable, given the number of admins and the fact that historically, at least from where I see it, action has rarely been taken when it is not ready to be announced quite shortly.

Part IV: Member Protection and Watchdogs

Two Watchdogs with access to the Staff Lounge will monitor the Staff for improper behavior. Watchdogs serve a six month term, with some flexibility according to circumstances. Watchdog selections will be announced in AQG by the outgoing Watchdog who will accept nominations from members via PM or email, with a copy to a designated Admin. Nominations will last normally 2 weeks. New Watchdogs will be selected from the Nomination list by the Admins after consultation with the Moderators and Watchdogs.

1. Moderators and Admins are, first and foremost, members of the board, and, as such, are subject to and protected by the above standards.
2. Privacy: Certain aspects of Staff decisions are not discussed with members due to concerns over privacy and security. Staff will not give out email addresses, IP addresses, passwords, or other personal details about members to other members. This is for your protection as much as it is for ours. Because of this, some cases may be resolved with no visible effect.
3. Mods and Admins are accountable for their words and will be held to them, more so than the average poster, because of the responsibility their position entails.
4. Failure by the Staff to abide by Board and Moderator Guidelines can constitute grounds for removal from their position, at the discretion of the Admins after consultation with the watchdogs. Admins can only be removed via a silver bullet, or possibly a stake in the heart (necessary for Corwin), and followed by hanging and then decapitation.

Someone else pointed out that while the last part is funny, it doesn't exactly belong in the official guidelines. I agree.

Part V: Guideline Change Process:

1. Part I of the guidelines will be put before the members once a year for a review and ratification by the membership. If the ratification fails, the Staff will modify the document based on member proposals until that section of the document is ratified by the membership in a new vote. All voting on Guidelines will be open for a period of 7 days.

You know, this still has review by the membership, and I wished we'd had the two steps separately here. Once a year is quite a long time and I also wish this had been discussed.

2. The other sections of the guidelines and board features will be reviewed periodically by the Staff and during the general review process. The membership may propose changes to the Staff at anytime including holding informal votes on these sections of the guidelines and board features. Implementation of these proposed changes will only be done by the Staff. The Staff retains the right to refuse any change that could hinder the smooth operation of the board or conflicts with Ex Isle’s Terms of Service agreement.

Does an informal vote require going through the poll process, or can it just be started?

3. Members can request a Poll to change parts of Part I: Expected Member Behavior and General Posting Rules at any time. These Polls must have a clearly agreed upon wording and number of requests required to institute a Poll will be 10% of the members that have been active in the past month. (This number will be provided on request and must be published in the Poll thread) The Poll will be left open for a minimum of 96 hours. Again, the Staff may refuse the start of any Poll with justification if the proposed change has the potential to hinder the smooth operation of the board or conflicts with Ex Isle’s Terms of Service agreement.

Under the 'hinder' clause, quite a few of the changes already made would not have been made, had we fully thought them through (and I don't think we did and yes, I am including myself in that), and as I've said about other things, I think we're realizing that and would be more careful about changes from now on.

4. All active members with over 50 posts (Islander 2.0) are eligible to vote and make Poll or change requests.

Does this mean that someone with 40 posts (or anything else under 50) cannot support a poll measure (that is, they cannot make up part of the 10% of the active membership) for the poll? And since for polls themselves, this needs to be in place before the poll starting, if that *is* what it means, how could it possibly be enforced in a discussion?

Please be aware that the preceding guidelines/rules are not set in stone. Each case is different, and may be subject to conditions not readily apparent to all posters. When warnings are issued, consideration is given not just to the specific offense, but also the member’s prior actions and infractions. New rules may be added as circumstances dictate.

I have serious, serious concerns about these and I am by NO means the only one.
 
The whole warning system is broken as far as I'm concerned.

The SS got along just fine without that retarded warning ladder that Lisa brought with her from Trek.

All parts of the guidelines that deal with member squabbles and behavior should be MUCH more relaxed.

The only reason to ban someone outright and with no explaination should be a DIRECT threat to the board.

I don't mean dual registration either. Duals should not be allowed IMHO, but neither should they trigger the ban hammer.

A direct threat to the board would be hacking, porn spamming etc...

Anything else can and should be hashed out with the member either on the board or privately if so desired.

These things are not brain surgery and the more you complicate the guidelines the more members slip through your fingers...
 
Here..... this one has already been hashed over.

1. Introduction


The EFCL was created and still is a unique, democratic bulletin board. The Constitution serves as the rules and regulations governing conduct and behaviour for everyone who posts here. It is not a legal document, and certainly not enforceable by law. It is a set of guidelines, designed to keep things running smoothly and try to keep everyone happy whilst at the EFCL. If you want your experiences here to be positive, please take some time to read through it. In order for the board to work and be successful, we must all attempt to follow its rules as closely as possible.



2. Membership


(1) The Senate grants membership at the EFCL to potential members.

(2) Any active Senators may begin proposing invitations 2 months after their own activation. For example, if a Senator were activated on February 3rd, he/she would not be entitled to invite new members until the following April 3rd.

(3) Senators who fulfil the above requirements can propose the name of someone they would like to invite to the board by starting a thread in the Membership forum. In this they must state:
(a)Any related boards to which the applicant already belongs, and his/her usernames on those boards (i.e. Terran, STV, TK et al.), or in the absence of this, the relationship to the proposing Senator (IRC, chat, or personal friend/acquaintance would suffice)
(b) In no less than 50 words, a clearly labelled explanation of what the Senator believes the invitee would contribute to the EFCL.
The inviting Senator may also include any personal exhortations or other pertinent information about the invitee.

(4) The proposal thread should also include a poll, with the poll question asking the Senate if they would like to invite the poster in question, and the options "Yes", "No" and "Abstain" being the three options available in the poll. The poll should not be set to expire (i.e. set to -- days), as the administrators will close it when appropriate.

(5) Each Senator may propose or second 1 invitation per calendar month; however only 10 new members may be approved per calendar month.

(6) Every proposal must be ÂgsecondedÂh by two other active Senators to be considered for approval. Each Senator must clearly post in the thread that they ÂgsecondÂh the proposal, to avoid confusion with others who may post their approval with their vote.

(7) Invitation polls shall run for no less than 72 hours. 18% of the Senate must have voted before the poll is closed. When the poll has had 18% or more of the Senate vote and has been open for 72 hours or longer, an administrator will close it.

(8) If the majority approve, an invitation is sent from the administrators on behalf of the Senate to the invitee. If the invitee accepts, they can reply and an administrator will set a user account up for them. They can accept the invitation whenever they choose, up to a period of three months (i.e. an invitee invited on February 3rd can accept until May 3rd. In the case of disapproval, the invitation is rejected.

(9) Rejected invitees may be re-proposed 30 days after a rejection. An invitation cannot be proposed more than twice by a Senator for the same invitee. After an inviteeÂfs invitation has been rejected three times, any further invitations must be brought to the board administrators for approval before a new thread is created in the Membership Forum.

(10) Logging onto EFCL with an approved username constitutes an agreement between the Senator and the Administration to abide by all rules and policies as set forth in the EFCL Constitution and by the Administration in the Senate.



3. User Accounts


(1) Each Senator must use no more than one user account on the EFCL, specifically the user account originally approved by the Senate. To enforce this, administrators may use any means necessary, including, but not limited to, IP tracking.

(2) Senators may not share user accounts with other senators and/or non-members by any means, including but not limited to the sharing of passwords. There is only one exception to this:
(a) Administrators may ask a Senator to allow them access to his/her user account temporarily... for the purpose of performing administrative functions (i.e., the direct/indirect maintenance of the board and user accounts), however Senators are not obliged to comply, and may refuse to share their user account with an Administrator if they choose.

(3)All user accounts have one of the following designations assigned to them:
(a)Active: The Senator has full access to their user account.
(b)Inactive: The Senator has full access to their user account but may not:
-Vote in the Senate Chamber or Senate Invites
-Propose or second any Senate invitations
(a)Locked: The Senator cannot log in with their user account, and as a result may not participate in any board activities which require logging in.
Banned: The Senator is prevented from accessing the board for the duration of a ban being served under the terms of the "Warnings" and "Bans" sections.

(4)Any Senator may lock their account at any time. The Senator need only contact an Administrator via board PM and formally request it. The "locked" account may similarly be unlocked by emailing an Administrator.
(a)Administrators may take the precautionary step of locking an account if there is cause to investigate an instance of account theft, sharing, or abuse. During this time the account cannot be unlocked at the request of the poster; it can be unlocked only when the admins are satisfied that the account will not be used for further violations. If this step is taken for any of the above reasons, an announcement will be made, and the results of the investigation will be posted in the Senate upon conclusion.

(5) A Senator is automatically classed as ÂgactiveÂh if they have made at least 10 posts within the preceding 30 days. Senators who have not are automatically classed as ÂginactiveÂh
(a)"Inactive" Senators become active as soon as they have posted 10 times within the preceding 30 days. However, voting rights will only be restored for polls that have not yet started.

(6) If a Senator does not visit the EFCL within 8 weeks, their account is locked by the administrators, who will also send the Senator an e-mail explaining that it has been locked due to the 8-week absence, and that it can be unlocked by requesting it via e-mail to an admin.

(7) If a Senator wishes to change their username, he/she must clearly post a request in the Questions and Feedback forum. Only Administrators are authorized to make username changes, and will grant or deny the request in the same request thread.
(a)The administrators may veto the registration of any name, or any name change, if they deem the new name to be either offensive or intentionally misleading, or otherwise inappropriate (with an explanation given in the request thread). At least 2 administrators must post in agreement in the request thread in order to veto a request.
(b)Senators may change their names up to 3 times per calendar year, but must keep a changed name for at least 30 days before requesting another change.



4. Code of Conduct


(1) The EFCL is a board of friends who agree to mutually own the community. As such, it is the duty of every Senator to strive to keep a good relationship with every other Senator on the board. Senators should therefore respect each other and the opinions of other Senators. They should treat each other equally and without bias.

(2) The following actions are not permitted at the EFCL and are defined as follows:
(a) Flaming- this is insulting a person or people in a deliberate attempt to offend or degrade them. At the EFCL, flaming is not permitted against Senators, or members of any other boards at which Senators post.
(i)Flames are allowed in The Duckblind as long as they are in the flame thread. The DB moderator will monitor the thread. For more details, please read the guidelines in the actual thread.
(b) Trolling- this is posting with the deliberate intent to anger another Senator, provoke them into flaming, or encourage ill feeling between Senators.
(c) Tag-teaming- this is where two or more Senators jointly troll or flame another Senator or Senators.
(d) Harassment- this is the utilisation of board software to harass other members by posting or sending messages with the explicit purpose of intimidating a Senator.
(e) Issuing Threats- this is threatening a Senator with behaviour prohibited by this section of the Constitution, or with any action prohibited by law in the country of either the Senator issuing the threat or the Senator receiving it.
(f) Violating Ownership- this is defined as posting or altering copyrighted materials that break intellectual property rules without express consent of the copyright owner or original author/artist. This applies to original materials created by EFCL members that are identified as such in the posts in which they appear.
(g) Posting Adult Material- this is posting anything that is considered pornographic or graphically violent. Nudity, and moderate violence may be permitted at the discretion of the forum moderator(s)/webmaster, however they reserve the right to enforce the use of warnings in thread titles, and the use of links to such material as opposed to the posting of it directly on the board. Threads of an overtly adult nature should be kept within the relevant forum (designated in the "Forums" section).
(h) Privacy Violation- this is posting real life details of Senators without their consent.
(i) Flooding- this is defined as posting multiple posts back-to-back in the same thread, or the bulk posting of off-topic / non-relevant material in multiple threads in the same forum or across the board. For the EFCL's purposes, it is regarded differently from spamming (see below).
(j) Spamming- At the EFCL, spamming is only forbidden in the "Operations" and "Proposals, Policies and Politics" sections. These forums are largely for the purpose of administrative functions and the mature and serious discussion of EFCL business. At the EFCL, any posts in the "Operations" or "Proposals, Policies, Politics" forums which are vastly off topic, or any conversations within these forums which deviate greatly from the business at hand can be treated as spamming. Often, this is at the discretion of the forum moderator, so all Senators should bear this in mind when posting.
(k) Leaking- Some forums on the board are hidden from view to non-members, for the mutual benefit and protection of the entire Senate. All forums in the Âgproposals, Policies and PoliticsÂh and ÂgDepartmentsÂh sections, amongst others, are hidden. EFCL takes the privacy of the Senate seriously. It is therefore forbidden to discuss events in these forums and to repost any material from these forums outside of their respective section (e.g. material from the Senate Chamber cannot be posted or discussed outside of the forums in the ÂgProposals, Policies and PoliticsÂh section). The exception to this is the discussion of such issues between Senators on board PM, e-mail, or other private communication. This excludes chatrooms if non-Senators are present or non-Senators are logging the discussion.
(l) ToS Violation- this is any action that violates the Terms of Service Agreement put forth by our host provider. It is important that every member read and be familiar with the Terms of Service as posted in the Help section.
(m) Unsolicited Reproduction- this is the posting on board of any correspondence that has not occurred in internet BBS forums, and has not been approved by a minimum of 75% of the participants of the correspondence. This includes, but is not restricted to: Instant Messaging conversations, Private Messages, e-mails, audio conversations and chatroom conversations/chat logs. Reproduction of such correspondence can only occur if at least 75% of the alleged participants agree to it. This can be done via contacting the forum moderator, an administrator, or posting consent publicly- however authorization must be given prior to the posting of the correspondence.



5. Warnings and Bans


(1) Warnings are given for serious violations of the Code of Conduct. Friendly advice is always preferable. Moderators should e-mail or PM the board user who has received the warning after they record it in the official topic (see below).

(2) Warnings expire individually every 6 calendar months (e.g. if you are warned on February 3rd, the warning will expire August 3rd)

(3) To facilitate ease of administration, warnings must be entered into a special thread in QSF. The thread will be 'pinned' at the top of the forum.

(4) The banning system relies on the total number of warnings a user has been issued. The thresholds for various lengths of bans are given below:
(a) 3 warnings = 1 day ban
(b) 5 warnings = 1 week ban
(c) warnings = 1 month ban
(d) 9 warnings = Senate vote to determine length of ban from the following choices:
(i) 3 month ban
(ii) 6 month ban
(iii) Permaban with 1 revote after 1 month away; if the vote is "No", ban is irrevocable.

(5) In serious cases involving an attack on the board from a user or a group of users, the Administrators may immediately ban the user(s) pending the appropriate number of warnings being issued. The appropriate ban length is then completed as normal.

(6) If a user is banned indefinitely, they may re-apply for membership one month or more after the ban began. They must contact an administrator, who will create a poll in the Senate Chamber. Other users will vote in the poll in full knowledge of the user's identity. The Administrators may veto the result of this poll.

(7) If the user's application is successful, they are readmitted to the board, but forfeit any post count, private message records, moderator privileges or access to private forums they had before ÂEhowever ÂEthey may take up their original username if they desire. The original user account should be deleted.

(8) If the reapplication is unsuccessful, the user is excluded from the board and will be given no further chances to return.



6. Appeals Process


(1) If any Senator feels they have been unjustly warned, they may appeal. They must PM the Appeals Judge within 48 hours after receiving the warning to set up your appeal.

(2) The Appeals Judge will pick five Senators at random (a utility in the Membership list has been provided for this) who will form The Appeal Council, as well as 2 additional Senators to act as Alternates if one of the original 5 cannot fulfill their duties. The Council and the 2 parties involved in the warning will be given access to the Appeals forum for the duration of the process. The Appeals Judge will open a topic in the Appeals forum where both the moderator and user each have 48 hours to make their cases.

(3) The defendant will make his case defending the warning first, and then the moderator will make his counter arguments. Failure of the moderator to state their case results in the warning being revoked; failure of the user to state their case results in the warning standing. Each party is allowed one rebuttal before the jurors render their decisions.

(4) If you wish to submit a PM as evidence, contact an Administrator to confirm that a PM is valid. Once it has been confirmed, you may submit it as evidence. The PM needs to be kept in your inbox in order to verify its authenticity. The Administrator in question will post a confirmation in the thread. For privacy reasons, any appeal that requires the submission of a PM will be held in a forum viewable only to those in the appeals group.

(5) After this, the 5 members of the Council must vote by posting either "Revoke" or "Remain." This will be done within a 48-hour period, but may be extended to the Judge's discretion. Any members of the Council who have not voted within this time shall forfeit their right to vote and may be replaced in the account of a deadlock (2-2 vote).

(6) The warning will then either remain on the user's permanent record or be revoked and erased. Completed appeals are moved to the Appeals Archive forum, which is locked but viewable to the entire membership. The Appeals Judge or Administrator may remove personal information and graphic content. Please note that due to time constraints, your appeal may be delayed until after an appeal already underway is completed.

(7) Only one appeal shall be active at any time when there is sensitive material present and no more than three appeals shall be held at any time.



7. Moderators and Assignments


(1) The primary task of a moderator is to ensure the smooth running of his/her forum. This includes:
(a) Moving topics to appropriate forums and splitting off posts into separate topics when required, managing sticky topics and announcements, and where appropriate (such as the Senate) locking topics or polls that have expired.
(b) Micromanagement of their forum, e.g. setting posting guidelines on forum-specific issues, e.g. the rules of RPGs or notices about spoilers. Editing or deleting posts when the author requests it and/or is unable. Editing posts that break the rules on behaviour so seriously the material is unacceptable, e.g. pornography.
(c) Moderators are also the first point of contact for posters on the board. Moderators may receive e-mail, instant messages, or private messages concerning various forum issues they will be required to deal with. Moderators shall refer any issues to the board Administrators if and when they feel this is necessary.
(d) The moderators and administrators have the use of a private forum. This forum shall only be open to them for viewing and posting. All moderators and administrators have the right to view and post in this forum.
(e) Temporary moderators will be appointed from the current moderators by the administrators in cases of Leaves of Absence (vacation, family issues, etc.). See the Elections & Reviews section for more information.

(2) Moderation of the EFCL by Forum:
(a) Announcements: Run by the Administrators.
(b) The News Room: Run by the News Director, under the auspices of the administrators.
(c) The Lounge: Two moderators.
(d) The Smoko Room & The Night Club: One moderator, over 21 years of age.
(e) The Duckblind: One moderator.
(f) Multimedia, Cyberlife and Fan Art/Fiction: One moderator handles all three forums.
(g) Science Fiction, Star Trek: One moderator handles both forums.
(h) Departments: One moderator per department, elected internally by the department members.
(i) Questions & Feedback: Run by the Administrators.
(j) Chatroom Q&F: Moderated by the Chat Administrator.
(k) The Senate Chamber: Run by the Administrators. Assisted by the Senate Speaker. The Speaker keeps track of all Senate business, setting up and maintaining a docket if necessary, setting up polls, keeping discussions on track, and seeing to the timely archiving of closed business.
(i) The Speaker is currently an inactive position, until such time as the Senate deems the position is once again needed.
(l) The Archive: Run by the Administrators.
(m) Bulletin Board Politics: One moderator. This should be the only forum they moderate, and this person should not be an Administrator.
(n) Appeals Forum: Run by the Appeals Judge. The Judge is responsible for prioritizing, setting up, and running appeals.



8. Administrators


(1) Administrators must implement the results of Constitutional amendments or successful requests in the Senate, within a reasonable time.

(2) Administrators are responsible for implementing the requests of forum moderators (for example, prevent sticky topics from being posted, change the forum description, etc). Admins are responsible for overseeing the registration process and keeping the peace in Senate Invites. Admins additionally double as moderators in Announcements and QF.

(3) Admins also act as peacekeepers on the board. They can and will moderate any forum. They are expected to answer questions in QF and Announcements, and help to resolve disputes that spill over onto the board, as a backup for the moderators themselves.

(4) Admins are responsible for keeping the environment friendly, helpful, and inviting. Admins are responsible for organising elections (when the Senate Speaker is unavailable) and enacting bans if and when required.

(5) Administrators can also read private messages. This will only be done to confirm reported instances harassment, flaming, or other breaches of the Code of Conduct. Administrators can issue warnings for the content of a private message as per the rules set in the Code of Conduct, but, in general, will respect the privacy of your personal communications. Anything you do not want anyone to see should be done via e-mail or some other means not connected with the board.

(6) Only current moderators can be elected to the position of Administrator, and must have held their moderator position for a minimum of 30 days.

(7) No greater than 3 Administrators will serve at any given time unless a proposal to increase or decrease this number is presented and enacted within the Senate. If need be, Temporary administrators will be appointed from the current moderators by the elected administrators in cases of Leaves of Absence (vacation, family issues, etc.). See the Elections & Reviews section for more information.



9. Leaves of Absence


(1) The EFCL recognizes real life must take priority over board life, therefore up to one month of staff absence without checking in is allowed, so long as the staff member has notified the Senate prior to departing.
(a) Unplanned Leaves of up to 2 weeks are acceptable.
Leaves of absence that exceed 2 weeks should be announced to the Senate.
(b) If a staff member needs to leave for over 1 month, a new election will be held for that position.
(c) If a staff member vacates their position for over 14 days (excluding Leaves of Absence), they will be replaced by election.

(2) If a Leave is due to last longer than planned, the staff member should make an effort to contact the EFCL. This includes, but is not restricted to, e-mailing someone to ask them to request an extension on their behalf, stating any reasons they feel compelled to give, or posting themselves to request an extension.

(3) A maximum extension of 2 weeks may be granted. After this, the normal rule of "2 weeks absence and you're out" applies. A poll will be taken in the Senate as to whether any extension will be granted (i.e., if the Senate feels the extension to be necessary). This should not be a regular scenario, since most Leaves will not be longer than 1 month.



10. Elections and Reviews


(1) Eligibility & Limitations
(a) A poster is eligible to be a mod if they have been at the board for at least two months and have not earned a warning in the past month. If a candidate wishes to make speeches or campaign, they may open a separate thread in the Senate; they should not do so in either the Nominating or voting threads. Campaigning via PM is not allowed, and grounds for disqualification, and should be reported to the Admins.
(b) Senators may win and hold no more than 2 EFCL staff positions simultaneously. If a Senator is elected a third full-term position, a choice must be made immediately which 2 position the Senator intends to keep. A staff member who is asked to temporarily take a vacated position is exempt from the rule, provided they hold the position for no more than 14 days without an election. After 14 days, an election must be held or another staff member should be appointed to fill in. This applies to all staff: administrators, moderators, and/or any other elected/appointed position that includes the use of the Mod CP in its duties.

(2) Nominations & Voting
(a) Modships for each area would have a separate election. Members should nominate themselves, not others. All candidates receiving a "seconded" vote from another member in the Nominations thread will be considered for voting. In the Voting thread, members would vote for the one candidate they feel should be Mod.
(b) If a mod or admin steps down within 30 days of taking up his post, the person that came 2nd in the election is automatically given the post, without the need for a new election. This only applies in Alternative Vote elections.
(c) When there are only two nominees, a simple majority poll is held. The nominee with the most votes gets the position.

(3) Staff Reviews
(a) Every 3 months, all administrators and moderators will be subject to a review. On set dates (January 10th, April 10th, July 10th, October 10th) of each year, the reviews will take place.
(b) A review forum will be created in the PPP section that is hidden all year to all but the moderators/administrators except for the 10th to the 15th of January, April, July and October of each year. On the 10th of these months, a poll will be opened for each admin/mod position and occupant on the board. For example, if a mod were assigned to two fora as one duty then theyÂfd have one poll; if they were an admin also, or held two fora as two separate positions then there would be two polls.
(c) Posters vote for one of 3 options for 3 days under the poll question "Are you satisfied with the job (name of moderator/administrator) is doing?Âh These options are "Yes", "No", and "Abstain". Posters may also post constructive criticism and comments in these threads. At the end of 3 days (some time on the 13th), the polls are closed and the results are tabulated and posted in the Announcements forum.
(d) If a moderator's approval rating is 60% or over "Yes", they retain their position. If it is less than 60% "Yes", the original moderator must step down, and an election is held to determine a successor in that position.
(e) Moderators can serve up to 3 consecutive terms with a review at the end of each one. Upon the fourth, they have a review but their position must go up for election whatever the outcome. They can still enter and win this election; if they do, it is counted as their first term and they may serve another two consecutive terms before mandatory re-election.
(f) Staff members must have held office for at least a month before being reviewed.

(4) Terms
(a) Terms for Mods should run until their next staff review. For all Modships, a vote of "No Confidence" in the Senate would prompt removal from the position, followed by a new election. The removed Mod would be eligible to run again in any election following the one necessitated by his/her removal.



11. Politics and the Senate


(1) Discussion of Politics
(a) Threads discussing bulletin board politics must remain in the forums of the Proposals, Policies and Politics (PPP) section. A staff member will move any political threads not started in the PPP section to the appropriate political forum. All discussions in the PPP section are private, and are not to be quoted or discussed on the non-political EFCL forums or on any other board. Any member who leaks material posted in the PPP by another member will receive a warning.
(i) The only exception to the above restrictions will be announcements regarding elections. Administrators may alert members that elections are taking place or post election results using the global announcement function. Since these are not threads for discussion of elections, administrators should lock them immediately.

(2) Voting and Polls
(a) All official polls ratifying an idea, motion or amendment should contain three options - 'Yes/Agree', 'No/Disagree' and 'Abstain'. Polls where several policies are competing should have one option for each candidate or policy, plus an additional 'Abstain' option.
(b) All polls except the special polls outlined below use simple majority voting. If Yes votes outweigh No votes, then the motion is carried, otherwise rejected. Additionally, if zero votes are cast, or the No votes and Yes votes are tied, the poll will be presented again to allow Senators to change their votes. No vote will be changed in a currently running poll. An Administrator should post polls in the Senate Chamber forum after a discussion topic in the Senate outlining ideas and opinions.
(c) The discussion should last a minimum of 72 hours and will be extended in 24-hour increments as long as necessary for the Senators to understand the proposal. The Speaker will state the proposal and poll options in the discussion thread prior to starting the poll and will give the Senators 24 hours for further questions.
(d) The poll will be started on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday GMT and will last 72 hours. The Speaker may extend the poll by 24 hours if it's started on a Thursday and Senators make it known in the discussion thread that it's a holiday/long weekend where they live.
(e) The Administrators may declare a recess of up to one month no more than two times a year, and up to one week no more than 4 times a year.
(f) All members are encouraged to participate in public discussion about poll options. Members may also discuss polls in chat, emails, private messages and private forums, but only so long as they are discussing topics, arguments, facts and accusations that have already been made public. If members discuss any material, make any argument or allege any fact touching on a current poll that has not been previously posted in the PPP section, they are required to post that private communication in the relevant discussion or poll thread. An inability to prove that a particular private discussion of a poll was within the above rules will be considered a breach of this provision. Members are encouraged to keep logs of all discussions regarding polls as a means of proving that they were legitimate.
(g) Any use of private communication, whether it be email, private message, chat or a private forum, to subvert the lawful democratic functioning of a current poll will not be tolerated. Any member who bribes, threatens, knowingly misleads or otherwise manipulates or plots to manipulate members in order to achieve a certain poll result will receive a warning and be removed from any official EFCL post. Any polls tainted by such behaviour will be nullified.
(h) Polls not in the Senate Chamber, Senate Invites forum, or the Staff Review System are unofficial, and, as such, can have any options, can last any length, and can be started for any reason.
(i) Members holding dormant accounts on the EFCL, which have less than 20 posts, recorded in the last 30 days will be automatically denied the right to vote in Polls in any forum in Operations or Proposals, Policies and Politics. Voting rights shall be automatically restored to the member once they have made the required number of posts.
(j) If any of the above procedures or rules is not followed for a particular poll, that poll will be declared invalid and an administrator will start a second poll.

(3) Board Changes
(a) Changes to the board and its forums are addressed democratically at the EFCL.
(b) If a user would like to change one of the aspects of the board, they must post a discussion thread in The Senate Chamber, outlining their proposal. Discussion length and voting follows the outline above in Voting & Polls.



12. Usergroups


(1) EFCL utilizes Usergroups to separate its membership into different roles in the operation of the board. The two types of groups available are Staff Usergroups and Department Usergroups.
(a) Staff Usergroups
(i) The Staff Usergroups are groups are made up of members who carry out specialized board functions. The available Staff Usergroups on EFCL currently are: Administrators, Appeals Group, Chatroom Staff, Moderators, and News Team.
(ii) Administrators / Moderators - This is a closed usergroup. Only elected or temporary board Administrators and Moderators will be in this group.
(iii) Appeals Group - This is a closed usergroup made up of all those involved in a current appeal, including both parties in the warning, the judge, the arbiters, and the reserve arbiters. Arbiters and reserve arbiters are chosen at random from the member list by the appeals judge. All members are only members for the duration of the applicable appeal, excluding the appeals judge, who moderates the group in addition to overseeing all appeals.
(iv) Chatroom Staff - These serve as Operators in the non-affiliated #efcl chatroom located on irc.terransystem.com server. Only the main Chat Administrator of the group will serve as forum moderator for the Chat Questions & Feedback Forum. This is a closed usergroup.
(v) News Team - These serve as reporters on the EFCL News Team. While this is a closed usergroup, members may apply with the group moderator to join the News Team. Only members of this group will have access rights to post a thread in the News Forum, however any unrestricted member may read and post replies in the News Forum.
(b)Department Usergroups
(i) The Department Usergroups are themed groups serving the function of lounges.
(ii) The available Department Usergroups on EFCL currently are: Engineering/Operations, Medical/Science, and Security/Tactical
(iii) Newly registered users may request to join any preferred department by posting in the Department Transfer thread, which is located in the Questions and Feedback Forum. If a member wishes to switch to a new department, they should do so by making a formal request in the Department Transfer thread. It will be the task of the Department Moderators to add and remove members of their respective departments.
(iv) Once a request is made in the Department Transfer thread, either the proper department moderators will remove/add the user, or an Administrator will do so. Moderators should PM each other to notify the other that they have successfully removed or added the user. All changes should be well documented in the Department Transfer thread. Only Administrators and Forum Moderators will have the ability to moderate (i.e. add/remove group members) the members of that group.
(v) As per anywhere else on the board, non-relevant posts can and will be deleted by the Administrators discretion from the Q&F Department transfer thread.
(c) The Moderators of The News Room, Chatroom Q&F, and the Departments will also be the Group Moderator for those respective groups.

;)
mm
 
Top