: Posted by David Wonderly in Discussion - Justice Bylaw, Part 1 (Final Round!)
: : Posted by Cordell Garrett in Discussion - Justice Bylaw, Part 1 (Final Round!)
: : : Posted by David Wonderly in Discussion - Justice Bylaw, Part 1 (Final Round!)
: : : : Posted by Vice Fleet Admiral Jack "Coyote" Dipper (Vice President) in Discussion - Justice Bylaw, Part 1 (Final Round!)
: : : : : Posted by Mary Church in Discussion - Justice Bylaw, Part 1 (Final Round!)
: : : : <SNIP>
: : : :
: : : : :
: : : : : This is the only part of the proposed bylaw that I have concerns about. I don't feel that it is necessary to tell alleged offenders who has made a complaint about them, as it could lead on to more unwanted behaviour (abuse, harassment, etc.) on sites such as Facebook, which are not taken into account as evidence in STF. It could make people less likely to come forward with a complaint if they know that their name will be told to the person they have reported. The nature of the complaint, and the evidence submitted should be enough to allow anyone who has a complaint made against them to compile evidence on their behalf and explain themselves and their actions.
: : : :
: : : : <SNIP>
: : : :
: : : : : Aside from that one point I've raised, I have no problems with this part of the bylaw being finalised.
: : : : :
: : : : : Mary
: : : :
: : : : The right to face ones accuser has been enshrined in law since the Romans, and currently is found in English Common Law (the right to cross-examination) and the US Constitution (the Confrontation Clause). From a "what is the real law like?" point of view, it's clear that it's a good thing.
: : : :
: : : : From an ex-President standpoint, it is hard to punish someone without being able to tell that person who made the complaint - the fact that a source preferred not be named when I banned someone during my Presidency caused me to have to rescind the ban.
: : : :
: : : : As for abuse on other sites, they usually have a system in place to lodge a complaint or, for the likes of Facebook, block a person. At the end of the day, we're not going to punish someone for irritating people (which is what a majority of the complaints for IRC are <G>), but the President will end up punishing people that either bully or harass.
: : : :
: : : : Jack
: : :
: : : Okay, I see this from both views. However, I see no problem with the way it is written but, I want to toss out a word of caution about repercussions...
: : :
: : : If I serve with Person A and file a complaint against Person A. Person A is good friends with Person B. Person B happens to be my CO on another ship. Person B takes offense for the sake of Person A and suddenly my RP character on Person B ship is locked. No promotions, no recommendations nothing.
: : :
: : : Only reason I bring that up is I have seen it happen in my tours in the military. Egos and friendships go very very far in some peoples minds.
: : :
: : : Dave
: :
: : Dave brings up a good point. Not only does it happen in the military it also happens real life on the job. I myself have been the victim of this same scenerio not only on the job but in another club.
: :
: : When I lead a task force, a higher ranking officer who had the ear of the club leaders took it upon himself to file a complaint against me because I took sides in a heated issue that he did not agree with. I was friends with the clubs XO and he and several other people did not like that.
: :
: : So to get revenge on me, they started impeachment proceeding against me. In the club you need 2/3rd vote to approve it. The vote failed but that was the final straw for about have the club leadership and what really hurt at the end was the person who brought the charge against me said that he did it because he could. That hurt more than anything and to this day I have never and will never forgive him.
: :
: : I'm just saying let's be very careful about this bylaw.
: :
: : Cordell
:
: There is nothing wrong with the bylaw. My point was simply to watch for it if/when we make the complainer public.
:
: I fully agree and support the bylaw as written. Thank you Tony and I'm waiting for Part 2. <VBG>
:
: Dave

There will never be a way to make both sides of this discussion happy. The reason for it is fear is in the middle. The right thing to do is to have the person bringing the complaint identified. It automatically eliminates a preponderance of the petty he said she said crap that makes up the majority of complaints. And it puts the complaint into a framework or perspective that is necessary in dealing with it fairly. The problem arises when the accused, or his/her cronies decide to bring retribution. Thus the fear I mentioned earlier.

It is my personal belief that bullies are cowards who will not stand up to the light. I do not want anyone bullying in this club. If someone perpetrates an actionable offense I want them sanctioned. If I have to give my name I will. If I have to answer for my opinions I will. If I have to pursue other means to make the right things happen I will. I hope the rest of you can see that sometimes the right thing isn't the easy thing and often it is even a scary thing. But it is none the less still the right thing to do.

Terry, climbing down off her soapbox now