|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | Northwest LARPers Investigation Process
| + | #REDIRECT [[Organizational_Rules#Northwest_LARPers_Investigation_Process]] |
| − | v. 20091201.7
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Section 1: Definition of Terms ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | These are the meanings assigned the following terms unless otherwise noted in this document.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Complaint- The formal statement communicated to staff that starts the investigation process. It is formal if it comes in writing directed to a staff member.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Investigator- The person empowered by the Executive Officers to look into the complaint based on the [[Infractions List]].
| |
| − | | |
| − | Evidence- Any written statement that can be attributed to a person with a reasonable degree of certainty or any thing directly witnessed by someone who the investigator trusts to be telling the truth.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Witness- Someone who directly saw the things complained of that violate the infraction list and will swear to it to the investigator and, if so asked, to the Resolution Committee.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Resolution Committee - the three staff members assigned to hear evidence gathered by the investigator.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Accused- The person being accused of violating the infraction list and/or player rules.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Accuser- The person bringing the formal complaint to the attention of staff.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Staff- A member who is serving in a position where they are being compensated with XP.
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Section 2: Complaint Assignment ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Complaints must be made formally to a staff member. (See section 1: Definitions) Please note that the infraction list is to be referenced when dealing with complaints. The complaint must be made within a month of the offending activity or when it is discovered.
| |
| − | | |
| − | In addition to describing the infractions the complaint must include a brief description of what steps the Accuser took to resolve the nature of the complaint before bring it to staff formally. If it is a case where no steps could be taken, state the reasons why they could not. If someone is making a complaint on behalf of another player they have to provide a list of who made the complaints and assure us that they wanted to make a formal complaint. If they cannot provide such a list or assurances they will not be allowed to make a formal complaint.
| |
| − | | |
| − | The complaint will be assigned to the head of the department that is most relevant to the nature of the complaint by the Executive officers. If there is no clear department involved, or if the head of the relevant department is involved in the complaint as accused or accuser or the chief witness to the complained of event, then the Executive officers will select another staff member to be the investigator who is not involved in the events surrounding the complaint.
| |
| − | | |
| − | In the case where multiple departments are involved the complaint may be divided into pieces so that they may be addressed by the appropriate teams. In this case a head investigator would still be responsible for making sure all the relevant information is gathered. The other teams providing assistance to the head investigator. The entire issue will still be considered a single complaint.
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Section 3: The Investigator's Duties ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | The investigator gathers the evidence and takes statements from the accused, the accuser and any witnesses. The Investigator can ask for assistance from more staff if they deem it appropriate or if the complaint is far reaching or involves many witnesses. The investigator will have a reasonable amount of time to investigate. Normally less then a month.
| |
| − | | |
| − | It is up to the investigator to find evidence or witnesses. The investigator must first make a reasonable attempt to investigate the situation without a public inquiry. If they can't, they may petition the Executive Officers for permission to put a statement on the NW Larpers forums that solicits for private messages or other communications from the playership. This statement will only describe the incident in vague terms and not identify any of the parties involved. The request for public posting will be granted with a few exceptions. If the investigator wishes a public inquiry when a Executive Officer stands accused, their request is automatically granted.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Information gathered by the investigator will be taken to the Resolution Committee for a finding based on the evidence. Oversight of the investigator would be made by the Executive Officers not on the Resolution Committee with spot checks unless they are involved in the nature of the complaint.
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Section 4: The Resolution Committee's Responsibilities ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | The resolution committee is made up of one Executive Officer and two other Staff not currently involved in the matter. The Executive Officer on the resolution committee is not to provide oversight of the investigator and if possible the members of the resolution committee should not have heard the evidence before they meet formally to hear from the investigator.
| |
| − | | |
| − | The investigator's evidence will be considered by the resolution committee and they will reach a ruling then report it to the rest of the staff within two weeks. The resolution committee may ask to question any witnesses directly if they think it necessary. The staff as a whole would work on the wording of the finding for publication.
| |
| − | | |
| − | An appeal from a resolution committee's ruling can be made to the Executive officers but it will not necessarily be heard unless there is new additional evidence or other mitigating factors. If there is fresh evidence or an error was made an appeal can be made to a ruling by submitting a formal request in writing. Such a request should include a description of what the new evidence or error was and be sent to the Executive Officers via PM on the forum or by delivering one on paper to them in person. It is solely in the discretion of the Executive Officers if they will hear such an appeal.
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Section 5: Publication of Results and other guidelines ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | After the staff has finalized their decision, it may be posted on the NW Larpers forums in a locked thread.
| |
| − | | |
| − | All parties may agree to not have the compliant or findings posted on the forums after it has been resolved, in particular if it was a mistake or misunderstanding. All parties would be the investigator, the Resolution Committee, the accused and the accuser.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Again, players are encouraged to talk informally with the other parties involved in an incident before making a formal complaint to staff. They can request staff utilize the 'Infraction List' in lieu of the Investigation Process as well. This process should be a last resort. We are a community first and foremost.
| |
| − | | |
| − | It is against the conduct rules for any player to make reprisals for use of the Investigation Process or otherwise treat a player unfairly for making a complaint. The intent is that this process won't be needed. If it is, it will be fair.
| |
| − | | |
| − | [[Category:Shadow Accord Organization]]
| |
