Organizational Rules

From Shadow Accord
Revision as of 18:45, 2 January 2018 by (talk) (Check-in (CI))
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

These are the various policies for how Northwest LARPers and our game, Shadow Accord, are ran.

Mission Statement[edit]

Shadow Accord is committed to creating an immersive roleplaying environment based on the World of Darkness: Dark Ages, with a focus on character depth, horror, and intrigue in a fun and safe way.

Core Values[edit]

Integrity: Shadow Accord prides itself on our member's ability to follow the rules of the organization. We hold our membership to a high standard of honesty, reliability, and fairness.

Immersive Atmosphere: Shadow Accord is a game about being in character. We have built the game around staying in character as much as possible and will continue to build it towards that end. Shadow Accord will focus its effort on maintaining and strengthening the LARP and its official events.

Active Participation: Members are expected to be actively involved in improving and maintaining all aspects of the game in whatever ways are available to each individual. Shadow Accord believes that effort is rewarded by the results of the effort, creating positive experiences for players on both an in-game and an out-of-game level.

Community: Shadow Accord is a game that believes that all members of the community are equaly valuable. To encourage Shadow Accord to grow, we take several unique steps to ensure that all members are treated with fairness and equality to the best of our ability. The friendships built from our shared hobby extend far beyond the time spent LARPing.

Story: Shadow Accord is based on White-Wolf's World of Darkness: Dark Ages but is not always a direct translation. The game will endeavor to be an accurate representation when it can and give the closest flavor to World of Darkness: Dark Ages canon when it cannot.

Organizational Rules for Staff[edit]

Northwest LARPers

Organizational Rules for Staff
v. 2016307.90

Effective as of March 7th, 2016

Section 1: Definition of Staff positions and responsibilities[edit]

"Or what's all this then?"
- Amber J.

The Treasurer[edit]

This position will be filled by the Nwlarpers board treasurer or their designated agent ONLY. Works with Check-in on Friday night of event. No volunteers. One assistant allowed for training purposes before replacing the current treasurer.

Treasurer responsibilities are as follows: Collect event fees on Friday and work with the ranger to ensure the site fees are paid. They are to make sure all players sign the waver of legal responsibility and ensure everyone at game is over the age of 18 and fit to play. They are to keep financial books for NW LARPers, see that taxes and government fees are paid on time. They can be called on to schedule events with the ranger. They are to make reports on the financial situation to the Executive Officers on a regular basis. They can approve expenses by other departments under $20 and above $20 with a signed approval of an executive officer. They are also to insure that the legal waivers are signed by players at least once a year and help Deco team track game assets. They will also take meeting notes at official staff meetings or see that someone else does and post the notes to the forums if the executive officers do not do so. They assist Check-in with non-character paperwork. They manage the payments store for donations and credit card transactions.

Administrator of Nwlarpers (AN)[edit]

This position can be filled by any trusted and technically proficient member of the playership or staff. There are up to two forum moderators and one Wiki Administrator. Not considered a head of staff.

Administrator of Nwlarpers responsibilities are as follows: They support and maintain the forum, website and guide all the forum moderators. The Administrator's helps maintains the wiki and the gallery applications, as well as updates any static content. The Wiki Administrator's updates any content, works to improve the wiki, works with the Character Guides and assembles relevant wiki articles into new editions of the Player's Guide(s) under their direction.

Decorations (Deco)[edit]

Seven full time positions filled from volunteers. Three volunteer positions allowed on top of the seven full time positions.

Decorations Team responsibilities are as follows: maintaining the atmosphere of the game. This includes maintaining the garb and props for CC/NPCs and set-up and take-down of the church, longhouse, inn, King's Trust and tavern before and after events. They maintain assets between events. This means washing, repairing and properly storing them within a week of event. The Treasurer can request a accounting of all assets from them at any time. They are to provide at least one member to assist with the loading and unloading of the truck to make sure the proper things are sent to game and return to storage afterward.

Safety Team (Safety)[edit]

Five full time positions filled from volunteers with cpr and/or first aid training.

Safety Team responsibilities are as follows: They are also responsible for safety and are to assess if something is a safety issue. They are to make sure there are adequate medical kits and supplies. At least some of their members must be certified to perform CPR and first aid with one on site at all times during events. They are replaced solely from the playership who has volunteered for the team.

Storytellers (STs)[edit]

Five positions filled from former guest storytellers or the staff or an exceptional member of the playership.

Storytellers' responsibilities are as follows: run the required cast characters (CC) and a few of their own plots in support of the story of the game. They are to provide a believable world by reacting to the players in a realistic manner and representing the greater world of darkness outside of town. They are also to ensure that while there might be emphasis on a faction in a given game, in the long run all factions get support and plots they can use to make the game a more rich and full experience. They own NPC policies and logistical matters directly related to ST camp. The Storytellers must submit requests for exceptions to normal duties to Executive Officers to vet. They hold the sign-in sheet and infractions log book during game.

Guest Storytellers can run at most two plots under supervision. They can also run errands for the STs and be full time non-player characters (NPCs) in order to earn experience (XP) compensation for their efforts. There will generally only be one at a time.

Check-in (CI)[edit]

Five full time positions filled from staff or volunteers. Two volunteers.

Check-in responsibilities are as follows: Maintain and update copies of the character sheets of players. This includes tracking XP and awards. They are also to pass out cast character (CC) packets to players if necessary as they check in. They are to insure that the treasurer receives all the payments collected for event. They are also to refrain from sharing private character information with other players. They are to create and print the registration sign-in sheet, including XP info from pre-reg or volunteering and see that Storytellers hold the copy after check-in has concluded. Check-in and the Executive Officers get a copy after game. They are to make sure everyone in line has a character sheet in advance and facilitate the character guides' work by sending new players with new characters to them.

Rules Team (Rules)[edit]

Four full time positions filled from staff or the rules volunteers. Two volunteers to help test rules in addition to the four full time positions.

Rules Team responsibilities are as follows: Craft the rules in an attempt to promote a healthy and vibrant role play experience at game. The team is also tasked with explaining the rules to the playership on the NW LARPers site if there are questions or if a clarification should be made. They are expected to be active on the NW LARPers site. The rules team will debate rules changes internally then solicit comments from staff and petition Executive Officers for approval of the rules changes. They are to publish major rules revisions to the playership by a means that conforms to White Wolf's (TM) rules. From there they can have them tested by selected volunteers from the playership and Staff. For major changes to the rules Executive Officers may require rules team to submit their proposals directly to the playership for feedback. Regardless any rules changes to the players rules are required to be communicated to the playership on the Nwlarpers site at least 2 months before they would be used at a game. Failure to post them at least two month before the next game will delay their use until the following event. The ST's can waive this requirement for themselves if they unanimously vote to do so and the executive officers have been given a chance to review the new rules on behalf of the playership.

The end goal of this team is to get the rules to a position where they need very little change. When rules stability is achieved, the Rules team will serve as references for the playership, assist in promoting better play, and help adjudicate any rules disputes.

Character Guides (CGs)[edit]

Six full time positions filled from staff or the playership. No volunteers.

Character Guides responsibilities are as follows: To review any new characters created by existing and new players to make sure their concept makes sense, is conducive to a NW LARPers event and works with the setting. They are to try to review concepts before event but must stay available to Check-in team on Friday nights to answer any questions from new players. They are to define the general setting as it affects character creation and to create and edit the Player's Guide. They advise ST and Rules on questions of World of Darkness canon. They are expected to be active on the NW LARPers site.

CGs must be familiar with all the current game rules including all organizational policies for players. All new character sheets must be signed or stamped by the CGs to approve them before they can be checked in. Alternatively Check-in can sign for them if they are provided a list of approved characters by the CGs. They are also to refrain from sharing private character information with other players. CGs can bring concerns about someone's concept, garb or demeanor to the Executive Officers to determine if they will be allowed to play or asked to leave.

Executive Officers (ExO)[edit]

Three full time positions generally filled from staff. Great care should be taken in their selection.

Executive Officers' responsibilities are as follows: Arbitrate disputes between members of NW LARPers, supervises and supports all branches of Staff. (Including filling in and performing any staff duty if required) This consists of communication with staff teams, fixing communication between staff teams, fixing communication within staff teams, fixing communication between players and staff teams, and directly communication with players about the game. They appoint and remove the heads of staff but must consult with the board of NWlarpers if they wish to remove the treasurer. They can remove non-heads of staff if it becomes necessary but every effort should be made to handle things through the head of staff leadership. They are to require the departments to be ready for each event. They are responsible for the layout and formatting of the announcements/newsletter produced every game.

In general they are available to look out for the general playership's interests in areas where full disclosure may not be appropriate. They also serve as points of contact for the public and are expected to be active on the NW LARPers site. Communicating with the Ranger and/or camp director on and off site and organizational purchases are an Executive responsibility. They can revoke anyone's ability to donate if they fail to fill a special donation that was claimed and can reject any donation as inadequate. They are also responsible for the organizational rules for players/staff and enforcing the rules and maintaining the infractions logbook. (Please see the investigation process for more information) Executives should coordinate every work party that players are attending and attend if no head off staff is available to do so. They should physically attend every Head of Staff meeting.

Executives need to review the public version of the head of staff meeting notes generated by the note taker to make sure they were fit for general consumption and that they are out out on a timely basis. Further they are required to do an annual staff review within the first quarter of the year and look for signs of burnout in the staff. The position will normally have three trusted members.

Heads of Staff positions[edit]

Every team but the Executive Officers and the Administrator must have a head appointed by those same Executive Officers. These heads of staff create further policies that do not conflict with their teams official descriptions. These heads are responsible for attending any meetings called by the Executive Officers as well as the regular meetings that will take place at least once between each Shadow Accord event or see that a team member attends in their stead. They should try to attend work parties and can supervise them at camp. They are responsible for accurately communicating with their team members- making sure those members stay on message and are performing their duties. They can add and remove any member of their team at any time. They can be called on to be investigators and serve on tribunals as part of the investigation process. They are required to be more active of the Nwlarpers forum and held to a higher standard then normal staff.

Section 2: Rules and Rewards governing staff[edit]

"With great power comes great responsibility."
- Stan Lee

As leaders and public servants within NW LARPers, staff is held to a higher standard of conduct. They are expected to follow and safeguard the rules that govern all participants, player and staff alike. The staff are accountable to the Executive Officers as they are ultimately accountable to the playership, more so if they are the head of a department. No one person will be a member of more than one staff team, though they can volunteer for another team. Exceptions to the rules are extremely rare. When they do happen, they must occur with a consensus of staff and Executive Officers. If it becomes necessary for someone to fill more than one non-volunteer position within NW LARPers it should be temporary only, as defined as at most two games. Staff can be called on to serve on tribunals as part of the investigation process

To thank them for their efforts, Staff members will receive XP compensation commensurate with their responsibilities but will still pay a full game fee like everyone else expect STs who receive a free game. All staff will receive 6 additional XP beyond the normal 3 XP for playing for a total of 9. Temporary full time NPCs will get 3 additional XP for a total of 6. Further staff are considered preregistered so will never miss out on game due to camp capacity.

Volunteer positions are not compensated as staff, but may NPC as all other players.

Section 3: Process for becoming staff[edit]

"None of the teams are ever going to be fully independent entities that get to make all of their decisions in a vacuum. For the day to day operations everyone should just get out of their way and let them do their job, but larger decisions will still require working with everyone else."

After a discussion with the other members of a department, the current head will nominate one or more of their volunteers, a member of the playership or another staff member to join their department depending on who is allowed to be nominated for their team. (See section 1: Definition of Staff positions and responsibilities for whom can be nominated.) The Head of Staff must email or PM their nomination to the Executive Officer email address or forum group.

If the head of a department does not nominate anyone or if the ExOs don't believe their nominees can do the job, a general call for nominations will be made to the playership. Once the ExOs have approved a nominee they will be taken on unless there are two or more acceptable nominations. In that case then the staff will vote to determine who gets the position. If there are no active volunteers recruiting can be made from the general playership. If a whole department is empty, the ExOs can select a new head.

The position of Executive Officer holds the greatest responsibility. We want people tested by their time on staff to prove their intent and competence for the role. The two remaining ExOs will nominate interested staff members for the position and may nominate non-staff with like experience from other organizations. If more than one ExO position is vacated at the same time, the heads of staff will vote on the nominations made by the remaining ExO, or by all staff if there are no ExOs.

Section 4: Process for changing Staff[edit]

"We want a healthy staff not independent fiefdoms that get in turf wars."
-Russell S.

Staff change is triggered by gross violations of the rules, unexcused inaction, to prevent conflicts of interest, unnecessary fighting with other staff departments, or by someone simply stepping down from their position.

ExOs themselves can be removed by a vote of no-confidence by a super-majority of the staff (66%). Any staff member can initiate such a vote on behalf of the playership or other staff provided they provide sufficient grounds for doing so, after an investigation of the alleged misconduct.

Section 5: Process for changing the Organizational Rules for Players and Staff[edit]

“I'd like to say that I think I'm learning more and getting more out of being on Team SA than I could possibly ever contribute... With a little grace, and a little humility, I know we'll make it.”
-Kristen M.

A living organization needs flexible rules, but not too flexible. Any changes to the organizational rules for players or staff can be suggested to the Executive Officers by anyone. However, the Executive Officers alone will decide if they will put any rules changes into effect. Changing the organizational rules for players is fairly simple.

Any major changes to the staff rules, however, must also be approved by a majority of the Heads of staff. (51%) Such rules changes should not be done quickly but with a chance for input from the whole of staff. Major change here means: Changing staff responsibilities drastically, changing the rules for removing staff, or any change to the process for changing the rules.

Northwest LARPers Investigation Process[edit]

v. 20091201.7

Section 1: Definition of Terms[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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.

Northwest LARPers Infractions List[edit]

v. 20091130.5 replaced at a vote on 2/1/14 by the heads of staff. The new version has more infractions spelled out.

Northwest LARPers Infractions List v. 20141140.50

Section 0: Intent of the Infraction list[edit]

Before we get started I want to give you the reader some guidance on using the Infraction List. First of all this document is meant to be used by staff to aid them in managing their departments. While it can be used with the Investigation Process the intent is to try to avoid the formal investigation process unless it is absolutely necessary. (See the Investigation Process here: viewtopic.php?f=59&t=979 )

We are a community of like minded gamers and my hope is that we can work things out most of the time. That said I want you the playership to be aware of the normal punishments staff can hand out so that if they exceed their authority you can make a complaint to the Executive Officers. On the flip side if some one is being a problem and the staff does not want to punish them appropriately the playership can attempt to do so through the Investigation Process.

Section 1: Definition of Terms[edit]

These are the meanings assigned the following terms unless otherwise noted in this document.

Investigator: The person empowered by the Executive Officers to look into the complaint based on the infraction list.

Private Warning: A private warning can be given by Private message, in person with no non-staff witnesses, in writing at event or by e-mail. Every attempt should be made to keep it between the staff member and the individual involved. It can be fairly informal. It will be entered in the Infraction Log at the staff members discretion if they believe it is warranted. (Minor Infraction)

Public Warning: A public warning can be given on the NW Larpers Forum, in front of other general playership at event as long as it does not overly break game, or in the game publications. This will almost never be done on a first offense and must be done by a head of staff or Executive Officer. (Minor Infraction)

Loss of Privileges: Examples- The loss of the ability to donate, NPC, be a volunteer, play restricted characters, tend firers, post on the forums or any other privilege granted by the organization implicitly or expressly. (Minor Infraction)

Asked to leave game: The player must leave the current event if it is safe. If it is not safe they cannot continue to participate in the game and must stay in out of game areas. (Major Infraction)

Suspension: Someone can be uninvited from game for one to three games. (2-6 months) (Major Infraction)

Banned: The individual is indefinitely removed from the playership. They may not have a forum account nor attend games or NW Larpers functions for at least a year. (Ban Infraction)

Staff: A member who is serving in a on going position where they are being compensated with XP.

Infractions Log Book: A book kept by the Executive Officers between games and at ST camp during game. It can be used to document private warnings or other staff actions taken at game.

Section 2: The Infractions Continuum[edit]

While all infractions will have a range of punishments based on a first time violation of the rules I think it is important and useful to list the full range of punishments that can be meted out. From smallest to largest. Note- these punishments are completely independent from any moderation on the NW Larpers Forums though such moderation may be relevant to any investigation and may count toward making the punishment harsher under these rules.

The range of punishments is as follows: (See Section One above for a definition of these words)

Private Warning (Minor Infraction) --> Public Warning (Minor Infraction) --> Loss of Privileges (Minor Infraction) --> Asked to leave game (Major Infraction) --> Suspension for one, two or three games (Major Infraction) --> Banned. The Investigation Process would be required to ban someone. Also of note: Three documented minor infractions can add up to a major one and two major infractions can lead to a banning subject to Executive Officer Review.

Section 3: Infractions by area with examples[edit]

There are several discrete kinds of infractions. Most violations are either: safety issues, forum issues, game rules issues, serious criminal offenses or failure to follow rules associated with a privilege. Here are some examples along with the range of punishments staff can hand out in a similar situation.

A safety issue would normally have the following result: Private Warning --> Public Warning --> Loss of Privileges. For example let's say that Frank S. keeps improperly building and/or maintaining fires. The first time they caused an issue they would be given a warning generally. If Frank kept doing things wrong after a warning or caused a fire though neglect or intentionally overbuilding the fire they might lose the privilege of building and/or maintaining fires.

Game rules violations are taken very seriously and would follow the following chart. Private Warning --> Public Warning --> Loss of Privileges --> Asked to leave game --> Suspension for one, two or three games --> Banned. The Investigation Process would be required to ban someone. This is a complicated area so I will give two examples.

Example 1: Jack Dan calls 2 damage when he can only do 1 by his mistaken belief that he had augment 1 by misreading the moon phase but stops doing so after being corrected by a rules team member. In this case there would be no further action as Jack after being warned corrected his behavior.

Example 2: Chet Cheatham is wearing plate armor and has had health levels and armor explained to him in the past by staff members after previous questionable incidents. Chet gets in a fight and has taken a total of 12 damage, 6 of which was absorbed by his armor and 6 of which was taken in health levels leaving him at 4 health with broken armor. He then goes into another fight without healing and without mending his armor and pretends that he is still at full health and is wearing full armor. He then takes another another 16 damage in that fight and claims he is at 2 health. This is cheating. In this example given the history Chet would likely be Suspended or banned after an investigation.

Serious Criminal offenses are not tolerated. Asked to leave game --> Suspension for one, two or three games --> Banned. For example Jim Bob is fighting with his boffer and Jill gets hit in the head on accident. She kicks him in the groin intentionally and seriously in response. In this example Jill would be asked to leave game at the very least.

Failure to follow rules associated with a privilege is a good way to lose that privilege. Private Warning --> Public Warning --> Loss of Privileges. For example Atlas Actorson is given explicit instructions by ST camp for how he is to play the Great Feniris. Instead Atlas runs from all battles and says that wraiths are the wolves new gods. In this example ST camp would likely forbid Atlas from NPC'ing from that point on. They could also suspend his privileges for a set period.

Dereliction of Duty (Staff) It covers just not performing ones job after warnings. Private Warning --> Public Warning --> Loss of Privileges. It may lead to loss of the ability to serve on staff. For more intentional rule breaking look at another rule. For example Ken Kenderson is on Deco and Safety and he sees a dangerously built fire. He walks on without taking any action. He then leaves game unexcused and does not help with tear down again. These are both Dereliction of Duty. This would lead to him likely being fired from his position and would in addition put a offense on his record.

Ad hominem (personal) attacks on Staff This will not be tolerated. Public Warning --> Loss of Privileges --> Asked to leave game --> Suspension for one, two or three games. For example Sylvia Sharp is at check-in. She berates a member of the staff for making a simple math mistake, swears at them and accuses them of trying to cheat her. This is going too far and in this example Sylvia would be asked to leave game.

Avoiding Check-in/Character Guides is not wise and can get you in trouble. Private Warning --> Public Warning --> Loss of Privileges --> Asked to leave game. Not paying for event is not fair to everyone else and not being prepared is much the same. For example Ferris Faker wants to try Shadow Accord but does not want to pay for it. He shows up at game and snags a blank character sheet. He fills it out but does not pay, talk to the Character guides or go through check in. He is discovered on Saturday night. In this situation since Ferris did it on purpose he would likely be asked to leave game or at the very least get a public warning and have to pay.

Lying to Character Guides about your concept or trying to play a restricted class without permission could lose you the right to play one. Private Warning --> Public Warning --> Loss of Privileges. For example Sara Slippery tells character guides that she is going to play a unrestricted cub but she plans to play an elder. She puts more on her character sheet after getting it approved and goes into game trying to play a restricted elder character. She is discovered by one of the Character Guides when they hear that she is playing a elder poorly. In this case Sara would lose the right to play a restricted character, her current character and would likely get a public warning.

Poor Sportsperson-ship is a catch all category for anyone who is intentionally making trouble out of game to other members of the community. Private Warning --> Public Warning --> Loss of Privileges. For example Jack Jackson has a problem with a group of players who he thinks killed his character for a poor reason. He tries to make them look bad out of game by starting a whispering campaign against them and every new character he makes hates them. In this case Jack would get a warning but if he kept at it all his minor offense warnings might add up to a major offense penalty.

Egregious Breaking of Game is continuing to constantly break game or doing so in a very disruptive way. Private Warning --> Public Warning --> Asked to leave game. It is not asking for legitimate rules clarifications or to report a medical emergency. For example Clara Catperson breaks game to show everyone in a room a cat video on her smart phone. This would get her a public warning. If she kept breaking game with that cat video she would likely be asked to leave.

White Knight/representing others without their express public permission is mostly a forum infraction but could happen before or after an event. Please encourage others to bring up their concerns with staff directly either in private or in public or use Dear Abbot. Private Warning --> Public Warning --> Loss of Privileges. For example Eager Everett is trying to win a argument on the forum regarding a new staff policy. He claims to represent others who are not active on the forum: "Other people who don't ever visit the forum agree with me but I can't tell you who they are but I feel I must represent them." This kind of exchange is not very helpful and can lead to unproductive arguments. In this case Everett would get a private warning but if he kept at it may lose the privilege of having a forum account.

Forum issues are largely not covered in this document and I would encourage everyone to be familiar with the rules on the forum. One can lose ones ability to have a forum account and still be able to come to game as an extreme example.

Section 4: Other related guidelines[edit]

When possible someone should be given the benefit of the doubt. All players are encouraged to correct simple mistakes by others but should summon a staff member if the person is not understanding or seems to be willfully bending or breaking rules or being unsafe. If there is a serious incident players can invoke the Investigation Process but this should be reserved for the more extreme cases. For more details, see that process.

Asking for clarifications on rules and how to do things safely will never be frowned on. We are all here to help and have a good time. Part of that is understanding the rules and ways to be safe at game.

Northwest LARPers Ban Appeal Process[edit]

Northwest LARPers

Ban Appeal Process

v. 2010419.8

A person who has been banned form Shadow Accord may ask for an appeal after a minimum of one year from when the ban was placed. Once the person has told the Executive Officers officially and in writing that they are asking for an appeal, there will be a post created in the General Game Information forum asking current players for any input on this person to be sent privately to the Executive Officers via private message (PM). No information will be considered via any other electronic means including Dear Abbot. The person in question who is applying may also, if they so choose, gather character witnesses and heads of other local LARPs to give input on their behalf. All this information may be released privately to the rest of staff to verify it, when it is is reasonable to do so, and will be released directly to the person who submitted the appeal. At no time will names go on a record. Only the Executive Officers will know who provided what information. If it is deemed relevant who submitted what then the Executive officers will ask that individual if they are ok with sharing their name.

After at least a month of gathering information, the Executive Officers will bring the information to the next regularly scheduled Heads of Staff meeting. (These meetings occur within two weeks of event dates, both before and after.) They will review and discuss the information and then vote whether or not to allow the person a second chance. Each Executive Officer and Head of Staff gets one vote. (8 votes) A vote in favor must have 3/4 super majority to allow the person to return to Shadow Accord. (6 votes: Abstaining from voting or missing the meeting is considered a no vote)

If the vote does not pass, the person may reapply in one year but if their appeals are rejected one more time the ban becomes final. In the case of a ban in place for breaking state or Federal law, or in a case where the BSA does not allow the person on their property, an appeal will not be considered.