[sudo-discuss] johnny ban / process?

[Johnny]

Marc,

No quorum you say?  Sub-Section 3.2.2 "Maintaining Safe Space During
Conflict Resolution" states that my ban would have had to been ratified
online without quorum.

Sub-Section 3.2.2 Maintaining Safe Space During Conflict Resolution
>
> In the event that a conflict stems from one or more members being
> threatened by another member of sudo room or a member of the wider
> community, a temporary ban may be placed that person until the conflict has
> been resolved. *Consensus in this case may be obtained at any sudo room
> meeting and must be ratified online over a period of 24 hours in the event
> quorum is not met at the meeting*. Should the person being banned fail to
> participate constructively in the conflict resolution process as determined
> by the membership, the ban shall become permanent.
>


On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 12:36 AM, Marc Juul <juul at labitat.dk> wrote:

>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Johnny <mostmodernist at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I object that sub-section 3.2
>> <https://sudoroom.org/wiki/Articles_of_Association/Ban#Section_3.2_Conflict_Resolution> Conflict
>> Resolution has not been followed in the least.
>>
>> If it had been followed, then there would have been a facilitator chosen *before
>> the meeting where a decision is made about my access*.  This is plainly
>> indicated by this graphic on the wiki
>> <https://sudoroom.org/wiki/File:SudoRoom.png> and the text of that
>> section.
>>
>> Had this been followed, I would have been notified of conflict before
>> judgement, and I would not have been subjected to treatment I received
>> tonight by the law abiding members of sudoroom.  I should have been
>> notified by the facilitator as to the fact  that I was involved in a
>> conflict before judgement.  That did not happen.
>>
>
> Any member of any Omni collective can invoke an instant temporary safe
> space ban and then subsequent mediation and/or meetings can decide if the
> ban should be lifted or become permanent:
>
>
> https://omnicommons.org/wiki/Safer_Space_Policy#4..E2.80.8E_.E2.80.8FConsequences.E2.80.AD_.E2.80.ACof.E2.80.AD_.E2.80.ACUnacceptable.E2.80.AD_.E2.80.ACBehavior
>
> Yes you should have been informed that the safer space policy had been
> invoked. That was a mistake. If any volunteers are available to act as
> conflict steward and mediator then they will contact you. Note that in sudo
> room articles are our guidelines and consensus can overrule any existing
> rules including invoking/revoking bans. It looks to me like there has been
> no meeting with enough members for quorum since this happened (can someone
> verify or correct this if they attended recent meetings?). If this is
> correct then you are temporarily banned based on the safer spaces policy
> until mediation can conclude or a decision is made by a quorum of minimum
> 10 sudo room members. If there has been no consensus decision with quorum
> then you are not banned from Noisebridge. I apologize for that statement (I
> was not at that meeting and may have misinterpreted the wiki notes).
>
> --
> marc/juul
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20160720/e123a6c5/attachment.html>