Ron: seems like we have been all over the map with ideas about enforcement; this topic seems to have a wide range of offenses, so the enforcement may vary greatly; we talked about staff always having the final say/discretion; we did talk about having some specific enforcement for this topic, but that could be hard
Philip: seems like we have some things written down from last time;
Michael: gray area – what if someone is very conservative in terms of seeing someones dress and they think it is too risqué and the staff has no problem with it; seems like it boils down to what the staff says
Ron: there are subtleties to this rule
Jonathan: proposes we have no enforcement for this rule; seconded by John – this proposal is dropped
Philip: as an action of enforcement, if you have a concern, and you feel like something isn’t right, you bring it to the staff; and the staff has the ability to act or not
Mark: take each action on an ad hoc basis at the discretion of the staff
Michael: Any action or participating that seems to be offensive could incur….
Ron: the staff will deal with any issue brought up
Philip: we want to empower the community to act, so if we say,
Ron: does that imply that something would need to be brought to the attention of the staff before the staff would act?;
Philip: we should find a way to say that we are being proactive about it
Michael: what if someone finds something offensive to them, but the staff doesn’t
Mark: that is why it is at the discretion of the staff; Anna just got on my nerves about 10 seconds ago; anything that comes to the attention of the staff is dealt with on a case by case basis
Ron: if you think about the community, there could be a wide range of opinions, so the staff is left to upheld the ethic that OCP hopes to have
Jonathan: proposes: “Any issue that comes to the attention of the staff will be dealt with on a case by case basis with enforcement being appropriate to the nature of the infraction.”; seconded by John
Jared: how about adding the word membership
Alex: something at the beginning about: “due to the far reach of this rule”
Jonathan: likes the open-endedness
Michael: think it should say something about what the enforcement could be and that the enforcement might be related to the rule breaking – could lead to consequences
David: level of enforcement matching the broken rule
Jonathan: “with enforcement being appropriate to the nature of the infraction at the sole discretion of the staff”
Michael: say a person does something and gets kicked out for a week – can they appeal some decision
Ron: seems impossible to know exactly how the staff and membership will intermingle in the future; these are all guidelines and the staff does have the ultimate say; maybe after this vote, we should add something about these being guidelines and the staff having ultimate discretion
Michael: what if someone’s offense and is so minor that it doesn’t need much attention but it keeps happening
Philip: it doesn’t actually say that the staff does anything – is this obvious and understood?
Ron: thats why the overarching statement at the top of the rules might get to this issue – that the staff is the enforcer – the staff might decide that the members are going to have the final say – maybe we should address this next instead of moving on to the next enforcement
Matthew: did we get rid of the part about “sole discretion by the staff”
Yes – 11, No – 0
No comments:
Post a Comment