|
|
|
Kelly McKiernan / pp / duties / procedures | |
| D. Terms of Use Enforcement Procedures The owners and administrators of LUGNET wish to foster a generally positive atmosphere of discussion. That’s not to say members are unable to freely discuss issues of concern - but certain actions which are demoralizing or otherwise detrimental to the health of the overall community are discouraged. Examples include: personal attacks within discussion, posting with the intent to elicit extreme negative or personal responses (aka “baiting”), using language that is not fitting with the intended atmosphere (specifically, strong profanity), and so on. The ToU is designed to discourage these types of behaviors. Historically, this has been a self-policing community, but the growth of the hobby and increase in number of LUGNET members has made that approach more problematic. Portions of the ToU have been interpreted many different ways by various people over the years, so much so that the overall spirit of the ToU has become less apparent. Periodic cleanup and revision of the ToU is a necessary part of helping the spirit remain clear, but it is apparent more clarification is necessary, hence this document has been created. LUGNET Policy Administrators will attempt to assist members in understanding where portions of the ToU apply in specific instances, but in the end it is the member’s responsibility to understand and acknowledge the ToU and the Policy Admins’ interpretations of the ToU. The owners of LUGNET have delegated enforcement authority to Policy Admins in maintaining the overall spirit of LUGNET, as embodied in the ToU. Some important things for members and admins to understand:
ToU Enforcement Process The following steps are taken in this order, depending on the severity of ToU violation. Steps are not mandatory; increasing severity or timeliness may dictate going directly to an advanced step, bypassing earlier steps. Each case will be based on an administrator’s judgment. An admin may take steps A-D without consulting the rest of the admin team (although standard practice has been to consult when time allows), while applying a timeout (step E) requires the agreement of at least one other admin.
Most admins are generally regular posters within LUGNET. As such, they are accustomed to respond to questions, help people find information, provide constructive criticism when they feel it appropriate, become involved in sometimes heated discussions, and so on; much like any other good member of a healthy community. The content posted by administrators not using an @lugnet.com email address is no more binding or “official” than any other member’s post; but like any long-time member of a community, they generally have a wealth of knowledge about different topics. Members should treat these posts as they would from any other respected member of the community. For example, if a conversation is bordering on violating the rules or spirit of the ToU, depending on the admin(s) and member(s) involved, the admin may choose to post as a “regular” member, recommending adherence to the ToU and possibly giving specific examples or suggestions. This is not an official action, but it should be taken as good advice. A non-official post is not required prior to administrative action being taken. Boilerplate Sample 2. Official LUGNET notification/warning from admin If the member(s) involved choose not to heed such a post or email, or if infringement is severe and in the view of the admins stronger measures are needed, the admin(s) will likely post (or mail) an “official” message, possibly reiterating the previous post or mail if one was made. This message IS an official pronouncement of policy and should be heeded by all parties. Such a message will be posted from an @lugnet.com email address, and if viewed in the web version, will have a small LUGNET icon next to the poster’s name. Such messages will ALSO have the full name of the admin and “LUGNET Administrator” at the bottom of the post, so there is no doubt this is an official LUGNET message. An official post is not required prior to administrative action being taken, if the infringement is severe enough. There is currently no exact boilerplate text for a warning, as the content will depend on the circumstances of each warning. Boilerplate Sample (modified as circumstances warrant) 3. Murfling of message(s) in question Specific posts that contain material the admin(s) deem in conflict with the letter and/or spirit of the ToU are subject to being obscured from initial view. This is known as “murfling” and does not remove or change the message. A visitor will see the following text when encountering a murfled post:
The visitor can click the “View Raw Message” link to view the unobscured message. The message will be in raw text format and will display no images, hyperlinks, or other parsing. Readers will need to copy and paste text into a browser’s Location field to see links or images. Notification to a member that one or more of their messages was murfled is not mandatory. Administrators may choose to send a courtesy email to the message author, depending on circumstances. Admins will not demand a post be canceled, but they can suggest it when appropriate. Purpose of Murfling Since its inception, one of the core tenets of LUGNET has been that each member should be able to express themselves without fear that their messages will be edited or canceled without explicit permission. This is exceptional within nearly any community, and is done in respect to each person’s unique perspective. Following that core belief, while at the same time maintaining the type of community as described in the ToU, LUGNET has implemented post murfling. This in no way changes the content of the message, nor does it remove it from view of those who wish to see it. It does, however, add a new layer of action necessary to view material that the administration deems in violation of the ToU. This is not a perfect solution, but it maintains the core beliefs of avoiding unnecessary censorship while preserving the overall LUGNET vision. 4. Warning email to member(s) Depending on the level of ToU infringement, the admin may also choose to email the poster and request they reconsider and cancel their post. The member is not obligated to do so. In most cases, murfling a particular message should be sufficient. In some cases where a member repeatedly posts messages that require murfling, a warning may be sent by email. The member may be warned, depending on the severity and number of murfled messages, that they could be subject to a timeout unless they discontinue posting messages that require murfling. Members are not required to respond to this email, however they are encouraged to do so, especially if they have questions or concerns they would like addressed. The intent is to avoid a timeout altogether. Boilerplate Sample 5. Timeout of member(s) Should a member post enough marginally ToU-infringing messages, or messages with content that substantially violates the ToU agreement, that member may be subject to timeout. A timeout is not a punitive action, rather it is a chance for members to reconsider and “cool off” when discussion becomes too heated. An email warning may be sent by an admin prior to a timeout being applied, but depending on the severity of the message(s) in question, this is not a requirement. Nevertheless, it is preferable to avoid timeouts whenever possible. Timeout Process and Structure:
Timeout Notification Boilerplate End of Timeout Notification Boilerplate |
|
Primary content in this document is © Kelly McKiernan. All other text, images, or trademarks in this document are the intellectual property of their respective owners. |
| |
©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR |