On Feb 22, 2013 11:17 PM, "Anthony Di Franco" <
di.franco@gmail.com> wrote:
Sudyo,
I have edited in a more advanced draft of my proposal for a rigorous conflict resolution process and for the role of a Constable to facilitate the keeping of open and transparent records about conflicts and where their resolution stands.
I emailed a bit about this a few weeks ago in response to the long and unsatisfactory non-process the group had just spent a lot of time in, and I presented a much briefer version of this proposal at last week's meeting. I intend to have it up for a vote at the next eligible meeting.
I have tried to incorporate the feedback I received during the meeting and to think through a process that would capture the original intent of the sketchy previous language but flesh it out with comprehensive detail and precision, and I had firmly in mind the memories of the shortcomings of the old process in practice. While I was there mucking around in the articles I fixed a few other odd things that were lying around. (It also still seems to me that the numbering is off.)
The whole draft, with my and other changes, is, as usual, here:
http://sudoroom.org/wiki/Articles_of_Association/Draft Highlights:
Emphasize horizontality in the Functionaries in general and in the Constable in particular: section 2.2: "Any member of sudoroom may perform any of the functions of any of the Functionaries, but the Functionaries are expected to perform their duties regularly and must perform them if no one else can or will." and section 3.4.1 below.
Define role of Constable (section 2.2)
Point person for facilitating the conflict resolution process according to the Articles, but not necessarily a moderator.
Stewards selection of a moderator and schedules meetings among conflicting parties and moderator.
Documents all meetings and communications relevant to the conflict resolution process.
Promotes good-faith participation in the process by conflicting parties on a basis of mutual respect and growth towards better relationships and a stronger community.
If conflict resolution goes before the whole group, co-facilitates with Facilitator, and handles points of information about conflict resolution with reference to the documentation.
Does not act as Constable in conflicts involving self.
Precise and comprehensive conflict resolution procedure:
Section 3.4 Enforcement
[edit]Sub-Section 3.4.0 Process
The resolution of disputes and disagreements within sudo room is encouraged through informal process and the spirit of a collaborative environment. There is a process, however, by which issues that are not resolved informally and that arise within the scope of these articles of association:
The party who seeks resolution finds someone to act as Constable in the matter, and works with this Constable to find a Mediator.
The Mediator is an impartial and uninvolved third party who consents to assist, and with whom all conflicting parties consent to work with towards a solution.
The Constable organizes meetings for conflict resolution and maintains records of all meetings and relevant communications among the conflicting parties.
The Constable, Mediator, and the conflicting parties arrange to meet to work out a resolution to the conflict that all conflicting parties consent to.
If at least one conflicting party does not consent to meet, or if at least one conflicting party is unavailable to meet in a reasonable time, all relevant circumstances considered, or if the Constable and Mediator agree after at least one meeting that further meetings would not be likely to lead to resolution, the issue is brought before the group in the following way:
The issue is added to the agenda of the next official meeting scheduled at least one week in the future, and all relevant documentation is gathered together by the Constable and made available to the group at least one week beforehand, preferably on the wiki, and notice is broadcast to the group, preferably on the mailing list, but information that would compromise anyone's privacy or dignity is not made public. In the description of the issue, the form of redress sought in by the plaintiff(s) is included. Both the Constable and Mediator must give their approval of the factual content of the documentation before it is posted. Both the Constable and Mediator must expressly affirm that the form of redress sought by the plaintiff(s) is consistent with sudo room's values.
During each meeting's agenda item on Conflict Resolution, all unresolved issues on the wiki are brought up for discussion followed by a vote.
First, the Constable presents all relevant documentation about the issue.
Then, a category of severity is established by consensus according to sudo room's values and the facts of the case. The category determines the voting threshold for sustaining a sanction against any party to the conflict. The categories are (in order of decreasing severity):
Any matter calling for membership suspension or termination.
Decision Procedure: 2/3 vote
Other serious conflict.
Decision Procedure: 2/3 vote
Conflict where only fiscal issues are involved and only fiscal redress is sought.
Decision Procedure: 1/2 vote
All other conflicts.
Decision Procedure: Consensus
Positive feedback.
Decision Procedure: Auto-approval
Then, the opportunity to represent perspective is granted to each conflicting party and to the Mediator, and general discussion may be held about the issue if any member wishes. The Constable co-facilitates with the Facilitator in order to answer questions specific to the conflict and provides information about the history of the conflict by referring to the documentation.
Then, a brief period of deliberation of definite time is held, during which members are free to consider the issue or discuss it directly with others.
Then, members may propose alternative remedies to the conflict, which are added to a list of potential remedies if neither the Constable nor the Mediator objects. They may be overruled in their objections if a second member supports the proposal.
Finally, a vote is held on the plaintiff(s)' proposed remedy, and then alternative remedies are voted upon in the order they were proposed, but only if at least one member indicates that the one under consideration is still relevant. After all remedies have been considered in this way, the matter is considered resolved.
Any conflicting party unsatisfied with the decision may place an appeal on the agenda in the same way that conflicts are placed on the agenda, except that a majority of the group must vote to accept the appeal during a meeting, and the process begins anew. The appeal must propose an alternative remedy and refer to values that were not served by the original decision.
If at the end of any step in the process more than an hour has passed during the current meeting in considering the conflict, any member may request that a majority vote be held on whether to table the conflict until the next meeting.
[edit]Sub-Section 3.4.1 Principles and Values Specific to Conflicts
The accused are presumed innocent unless and until proven otherwise beyond reasonable doubt.
Respect for the privacy and dignity of all members is consistently maintained.
Proportional and effective remedies should be sought.
Restorative remedies are strongly preferred over retributive remedies.
More precise language about functionaries:
Facilitator
Maintains the agenda for meetings, ensures topics are dealt with, and recognizes speakers in a fair and inclusive way.
Ensures that all group business is handled and all group decisions are made in the way described in these Articles of Association, by bearing them in mind and referring to them whenever needed.
Uses own best judgment to resolve ambiguity in the Articles of Association about how business is handled in meetings, but may be challenged in this by anyone who does not consent, which results in a majority vote on sustaining or overturning the Facilitator's judgment.
Scribe
Takes notes during meetings and collaborates with others to include their notes in final meeting minutes.
Posts notes publicly after each meeting.
Exchequer
Presents the budget during meetings, as articulated in the budget process below.
Receives dues and donations and pays expenses on behalf of the group, using the group's accounts.
Maintains accurate budget documentation and makes it available to the group.
Constable
Point person for facilitating the conflict resolution process according to the Articles, but not necessarily a moderator.
Stewards selection of a moderator and schedules meetings among conflicting parties and moderator.
Documents all meetings and communications relevant to the conflict resolution process.
Promotes good-faith participation in the process by conflicting parties on a basis of mutual respect and growth towards better relationships and a stronger community.
If conflict resolution goes before the whole group, co-facilitates with Facilitator, and handles points of information about conflict resolution with reference to the documentation.
Does not act as Constable in conflicts involving self.