A Discussion: Conflict Resolution & Punishment System
Jan 24, 2014 20:31:02 GMT -8
Thornstar and Abby/Blood Offerings like this
Post by Kaine Chandler on Jan 24, 2014 20:31:02 GMT -8
So, I'd like to start a conversation about how we as a community mediate conflict resolution and hand out punishment.
Disclaimers:
To be clear, this is Kaine the player, and not NOTR speaking.
This is not the result of a single incident, but rather observations over several years and several different Staffs. No one staff or person has created these concerns, and it is for that reason I feel like this is pertinent to game as a whole, not just a single staff or issue.
I am not seeking to blame anyone, nor do I wish to argue about a specific incident, but rather look toward our nation's justice system, our work environments, and any other extant body of conflict resolution to see what works, what doesn't and why. This isn't to create a legal system or even mirror one within game, but to seek out time tested solutions in other environments and see which ones can work for us.
Issues:
One of the things that is extremely important is that the people who are directly affected (those hurt by the "crime" or offense) CANNOT be those who pass judgement or assign punishment.
While I am told by staff that this is the case, there is not a solid system in place for that here, and I feel that it is reasonable to have this as a clear rule/expectation.
Additionally, punishments need to be given in a clear, systematic and consistent manner. One person should not be given a warning for a first offense when another is given a suspension.
We have had a desire to sweep resolved conflicts under the rug, but taking a page out of the corporate world, keeping a record of past transgressions, rulings and punishments would assist in making sure that future rulings and punishments are consistent across the community.
If in future staff can point to a fair and transparent system of conflict resolution, they will be at less risk of being accused of playing favorites or punishing people they "don't like".
Similarly, players will have a clear expectation of behavior and consequences, and faith that their concerns or infractions will be dealt with fairly, rather than fear being lashed out at by those who are mad or hurt.
This is not a quick or easy task, but it is one I feel is worthwhile. Watching the stress that these kinds of conflicts cause individuals (the STs as well as the players) is heartbreaking, and I think we can make it better.
Things i'd like to see included:
A system for recusing: a way of deciding when those who typically mediate conflict (STs and PAs) are too close/emotionally involved. This doesn't have to be a standing body of mediators. We can (like the Hague used to do) form a ruling body on a case by case basis. We can involve STs from other spheres (the Charter is a gamewide document), or we can recruit a panel from the player base that can demonstrate impartiality. There is a reason why the parents of murdered children can't sit on the jury. Our situations are never that severe, but it is still very important that those who are the "victims" or too close to them should not be doing the conflict resolution or punishment.
A clearer expectation of infractions: better define what is an infraction and what its punishment is. Players and STs need to know what is ok and what isn't. When rules are a matter of opinion, enforcement can become lopsided very quickly.
A system of escalation: In many cases the accused is required to acknowledge the receipt of the verbal/written, first/second warning. This should take place separate from the incident/conversation/email thread/board post that the infraction has occurred within. A record of the warning and acknowledgement of receipt of warning should be kept, so that when the infraction is repeated it is a matter of record that escalation is expected. If the warning is issued in person, perhaps have the ST and player sign a short statement, if in email, a simple exchange in which the warning is sent and acknowledged should be sufficient. It is important to note that the acknowledgment of the receipt of warning does not constitute admission of guilt or wrongdoing.
Transparency: History teaches us that secret trials are the tools of authoritarian regimes. The best way to protect EVERYONE (those who have committed infractions, those who have been wronged/hurt and those who must mediate and punish) is with transparency. Privacy is important too, There has to be a way to balance these things to afford max protection to ALL involved (players, PAs and STs).
Concerns so far:
Who would mediate/assign punishment? Historically, this has been the job of STs, aided by PAs. I personally do not see why this should not continue to be the default, however the question of who we turn to when the regular conflict resolvers are recused? How will this body be selected for fairness, and how will we make sure their powers are limited?
How can conflicts be represented fairly? More eloquent players may have a leg up in getting their side favored. This is sadly the reason we have representation (like lawyers). It was also one of the original jobs of the PAs, so that a flustered, emotional or uncomfortable player/ST could have a calmer more eloquent speaker present their side. Is this good enough or do we need to change it?
How do we protect privacy? This is a really tricky one. No one wants their personal issues painted all over the public forums. However, I also see occasions where the attempt to keep an issue private simply results in rumors and accusations. There is simply no way to keep people from being people, from talking about a situation within our community, so how do we balance transparency and fairness with protection of privacy?
What means will mediators use? What materials will conflict resolvers use and have access to in order to make decisions? If STs are able to decide, its fairly easy because they have access to all OOC info. When PAs or other players become involved, what information should they be using to understand the issue? How can we protect IC info while providing a fair assessment of the issue?
This is by no means a comprehensive list.
What's going on with this thread?
I'm seeking a system that will provide the most fairness and protection for everyone. EVERYONE. I really believe that the way people respond when they feel unfairly punished (whether it is unfair or not) or when they feel those who deserve punishment have been unfairly let off is hurtful to our community. The best way I can think to fix this is to help create a system where fairness and equitty can be more reliably measured, produced and observed by all.
This is not simple or easy. The issues here are centuries old and there aren't one size fits all answers. Additionally, we have a very unique social make-up to our population. Compared to society at large we have a greater proportion of people with unique mental, emotional and social needs, and we have always valued creating a safe and welcoming environment for all types of people. So, this might be more challenging for our community than, say, a tennis club.
There should be a note that what we are seeking is not "Perfection" but a system that is tolerable while still addressing its purpose.
This is a community effort. Brainstorm, make suggestions, raise questions but above all BE CONSTRUCTIVE. Please keep this discussion focused on the charter and its enforcement, and do not let it devolve into rants, discussions or rumors about specific controversial issues involving players and staffs.
Additionally, I have been asked by staff to remind everyone that the boards and forums are an extension of EC, and that all the rules of conduct that apply to Saturday night, apply here as well. So please take the time to think about your responses, take time to let your emotions cool if you need it (no one's gonna make this decision overnight), and refrain from saying anything you wouldn't say live and in person at game. After all, we're trying to improve conflict resolution here, not create new conflict.
Thank you all in advance for being calm, rational, problem solving folks. Let's work together to keep our community safe and fair for everyone.
Kaine
Disclaimers:
To be clear, this is Kaine the player, and not NOTR speaking.
This is not the result of a single incident, but rather observations over several years and several different Staffs. No one staff or person has created these concerns, and it is for that reason I feel like this is pertinent to game as a whole, not just a single staff or issue.
I am not seeking to blame anyone, nor do I wish to argue about a specific incident, but rather look toward our nation's justice system, our work environments, and any other extant body of conflict resolution to see what works, what doesn't and why. This isn't to create a legal system or even mirror one within game, but to seek out time tested solutions in other environments and see which ones can work for us.
Issues:
One of the things that is extremely important is that the people who are directly affected (those hurt by the "crime" or offense) CANNOT be those who pass judgement or assign punishment.
While I am told by staff that this is the case, there is not a solid system in place for that here, and I feel that it is reasonable to have this as a clear rule/expectation.
Additionally, punishments need to be given in a clear, systematic and consistent manner. One person should not be given a warning for a first offense when another is given a suspension.
We have had a desire to sweep resolved conflicts under the rug, but taking a page out of the corporate world, keeping a record of past transgressions, rulings and punishments would assist in making sure that future rulings and punishments are consistent across the community.
If in future staff can point to a fair and transparent system of conflict resolution, they will be at less risk of being accused of playing favorites or punishing people they "don't like".
Similarly, players will have a clear expectation of behavior and consequences, and faith that their concerns or infractions will be dealt with fairly, rather than fear being lashed out at by those who are mad or hurt.
This is not a quick or easy task, but it is one I feel is worthwhile. Watching the stress that these kinds of conflicts cause individuals (the STs as well as the players) is heartbreaking, and I think we can make it better.
Things i'd like to see included:
A system for recusing: a way of deciding when those who typically mediate conflict (STs and PAs) are too close/emotionally involved. This doesn't have to be a standing body of mediators. We can (like the Hague used to do) form a ruling body on a case by case basis. We can involve STs from other spheres (the Charter is a gamewide document), or we can recruit a panel from the player base that can demonstrate impartiality. There is a reason why the parents of murdered children can't sit on the jury. Our situations are never that severe, but it is still very important that those who are the "victims" or too close to them should not be doing the conflict resolution or punishment.
A clearer expectation of infractions: better define what is an infraction and what its punishment is. Players and STs need to know what is ok and what isn't. When rules are a matter of opinion, enforcement can become lopsided very quickly.
A system of escalation: In many cases the accused is required to acknowledge the receipt of the verbal/written, first/second warning. This should take place separate from the incident/conversation/email thread/board post that the infraction has occurred within. A record of the warning and acknowledgement of receipt of warning should be kept, so that when the infraction is repeated it is a matter of record that escalation is expected. If the warning is issued in person, perhaps have the ST and player sign a short statement, if in email, a simple exchange in which the warning is sent and acknowledged should be sufficient. It is important to note that the acknowledgment of the receipt of warning does not constitute admission of guilt or wrongdoing.
Transparency: History teaches us that secret trials are the tools of authoritarian regimes. The best way to protect EVERYONE (those who have committed infractions, those who have been wronged/hurt and those who must mediate and punish) is with transparency. Privacy is important too, There has to be a way to balance these things to afford max protection to ALL involved (players, PAs and STs).
Concerns so far:
Who would mediate/assign punishment? Historically, this has been the job of STs, aided by PAs. I personally do not see why this should not continue to be the default, however the question of who we turn to when the regular conflict resolvers are recused? How will this body be selected for fairness, and how will we make sure their powers are limited?
How can conflicts be represented fairly? More eloquent players may have a leg up in getting their side favored. This is sadly the reason we have representation (like lawyers). It was also one of the original jobs of the PAs, so that a flustered, emotional or uncomfortable player/ST could have a calmer more eloquent speaker present their side. Is this good enough or do we need to change it?
How do we protect privacy? This is a really tricky one. No one wants their personal issues painted all over the public forums. However, I also see occasions where the attempt to keep an issue private simply results in rumors and accusations. There is simply no way to keep people from being people, from talking about a situation within our community, so how do we balance transparency and fairness with protection of privacy?
What means will mediators use? What materials will conflict resolvers use and have access to in order to make decisions? If STs are able to decide, its fairly easy because they have access to all OOC info. When PAs or other players become involved, what information should they be using to understand the issue? How can we protect IC info while providing a fair assessment of the issue?
This is by no means a comprehensive list.
What's going on with this thread?
I'm seeking a system that will provide the most fairness and protection for everyone. EVERYONE. I really believe that the way people respond when they feel unfairly punished (whether it is unfair or not) or when they feel those who deserve punishment have been unfairly let off is hurtful to our community. The best way I can think to fix this is to help create a system where fairness and equitty can be more reliably measured, produced and observed by all.
This is not simple or easy. The issues here are centuries old and there aren't one size fits all answers. Additionally, we have a very unique social make-up to our population. Compared to society at large we have a greater proportion of people with unique mental, emotional and social needs, and we have always valued creating a safe and welcoming environment for all types of people. So, this might be more challenging for our community than, say, a tennis club.
There should be a note that what we are seeking is not "Perfection" but a system that is tolerable while still addressing its purpose.
This is a community effort. Brainstorm, make suggestions, raise questions but above all BE CONSTRUCTIVE. Please keep this discussion focused on the charter and its enforcement, and do not let it devolve into rants, discussions or rumors about specific controversial issues involving players and staffs.
Additionally, I have been asked by staff to remind everyone that the boards and forums are an extension of EC, and that all the rules of conduct that apply to Saturday night, apply here as well. So please take the time to think about your responses, take time to let your emotions cool if you need it (no one's gonna make this decision overnight), and refrain from saying anything you wouldn't say live and in person at game. After all, we're trying to improve conflict resolution here, not create new conflict.
Thank you all in advance for being calm, rational, problem solving folks. Let's work together to keep our community safe and fair for everyone.
Kaine