3ru7al has
the following platform
“My
platform - any and all code-of-conduct enforcement should be
uniform - regardless of the individual being considered and
regardless of where they posted”
creating a uniform code of
conduct is something airmax is familiar with doing and has done. He
also has enough of a prior relationship with the mods to be able to
influence them deeply to adopt a uniform policy he created. I am
posting his code of conduct from debate.org below. If 3ru7al wants a
uniform code of conduct, he should drop out and endorse the guy who
not only has created one, but who has the ability to make that code
of conduct a reality.
If 3ru7al is Going to stay in the race, I challenge him to
create the uniform code he wants to see adopted.
My guess is that not only will it pale in comparison to the one
listed below, but that his uniform code of conduct will be less
likely to be adopted than Airmax’s one, which I’m sure he is
willing to update, to remove even more ambiguity, not that there is
much of it.
Extended Code of Conduct for Debate.org (DDO)
1.
Definitions
1.1 Terms of Use. The rules agreed to by
members as a condition of membership, given at http://www.debate.org.............
Sometimes referred to as terms of service [TOS].
1.2
Trolling. Use of inflammatory language, personal attacks, or extreme
and unsupported claims aimed at provoking emotional response rather
than debate.
1.3 Vote bombing. Abuse of DDO voting
privileges by awarding points to a debater for reasons unrelated to
the arguments or evidence presented in the debate.
1.4
Moderator. A person granted authority by the site owners to enforce
the rule of the site.
2. Scope
2.1 If there is
any conflict between this document and the Terms of Use, the Terms of
Use takes precedence.
2.2 This document establishes
trolling and vote bombing as offenses punishable by a Moderator or
through trial.
2.3 This document establishes the
procedures for holding trials of members in cases where violations of
the rules as judged by a Moderator are for any reason unclear. Trials
are at the sole discretion of a Moderator, and the provision of the
Terms of Use whereby members may lose membership privileges is
unchanged.
2.4 The Moderator retains the ability to remove
a member or restrict privileges without benefit of a trial.
3.
Warnings
3.1 The Moderator shall issue warnings to members
upon observing patterns of their apparent trolling or vote bombing.
The forum post, debate, or debate comment exhibiting the offense
shall be cited in the warning. The member may choose to respond with
a defense of the behavior.
3.2 The warning shall advise
the member that repeating the offense may result in loss of
membership privileges.
3.3 If an offense is repeated after
the member has received a relevant warning, the member may be
subjected to, at the option of the Moderator, revocation of
membership privileges or subjecting the member to DDO trial.
4.
Trials
4.1 The member shall be notified in advance of the
trial.
4.2 The Moderator shall appoint a prosecution
team.
4.3 The accused member may select a defense team or
request that the Moderator solicit a defense team.
4.4 The
Moderator shall establish accounts for prosecution and defense for
the trial, which will be conducted as a DDO debate. The trial debate
shall be four rounds of 8000 characters with a three day response
period. The voting period shall be two weeks.
4.5 The
Prosecution shall prepare charges and post the charges with links to
supporting evidence as a challenge to the Defense. No new charges or
evidence of offenses may be introduced after the challenge. The
Prosecution may, however, post additional evidence in rebuttal to
defense claims.
4.6 All members having voting privileges
may vote on the trial debate.
4.6.1 At the option of the
Moderator, the Moderator may appoint a jury prior to the start of the
trial and announce that the verdict will be determined by the vote of
the jurors alone. If a jury is appointed there shall be either three,
five, or seven jurors. Each juror shall have participated in at least
ten debates. The jury may consider the membership vote in making
their decision, but are not bound by it.
4.6.2 The
standard for voting for the Prosecution is that the charges have been
proved beyond a reasonable doubt. A reasonable doubt is not any
doubt, but rather the doubt that a reasonable person would have given
the evidence of the trial.
4.6.3 Voters shall be
instructed in the Prosecutors' R1 that they may vote up to all seven
votes for the prosecution or the defense.
4.6.4 Voters
finding the defendant guilty may use the RFD to recommend a
suspension of privileges rather than permanent loss, and they shall
be advised of this by the Prosecutors in R1.
4.6.5 The
Moderator shall comply with the result of the trial. If a guilty
verdict is found, the Moderator shall select the level of
punishment.
4.6.6 The Moderator shall act as judge in
ruling upon trial procedures.
....
Personal
Attacks Policy
TL;DR: Personal attacks serve no
purpose and only harm what we are trying to foster on this site. They
will no longer be tolerated. This policy will take place site
wide--In debates, forums, polls, opinions, and everywhere else. Do
not make personal attacks, or there will be consequences.
ON
PERSONAL ATTACKS
This is a website of heated exchanges.
Yet it should also be a place where all users can feel comfortable--a
space where they can be free of personal attack. But on a website of
such variety of ideology, and that's intended to foster debate, it's
worth spending some time explaining what that means in our
context.
Personal attacks have always been against the
TOS. However, there has not been an extended discussion on what,
exactly, is a personal attack for the purposes of the site. Recently,
it has become apparent that that discussion is necessary.
The
following is an explanation of the sorts of things that are not
allowed on DDO, in order to keep this a place that fosters debate and
discussion. Expect this to be followed moving forward. This policy
will take place site wide, including in debates, forums, polls, and
opinions. If you have made personal attacks, stop doing so. If you
were thinking about making a personal attack, don't.
INTRODUCTION
A
personal attack, in the context of this site, is not "anything
directed at a person that they find to be unfavorable". Not only
would such a definition be absurd, it would stifle exchange and
debate. If someone is being dishonest, calling them out on it could
be considered by the literalist to be a "personal attack".
You are, after all, saying something negative about them, personally.
But that's not what's intended by the policy.
The goal is
to foster debate, and allow for even heated debate and exchange of
ideas, without allowing abuse and unwarranted attack.
Instigation
of a personal attack will, of course, face a harsher penalty than
reciprocating against one. But understand that the latter is not off
the hook.
The only appropriate responses to personal
attack are: taking the high ground and replying to it without a
personal attack, ignoring it, or reporting it.
Violations
of this policy may or may not include a warning--and scale quickly
from that, to a suspension, up to even a permanent ban. Airmax is the
final arbiter of the policy.
A personal attack can take
several different common forms. There is some overlap between them,
but it may be helpful to specifically outline a few:
DIRECT
ATTACK
This is where, outside the context of a discussion
on the topic or of behavior in the course of that discussion, someone
posts something negative about a specific member. Generalized
complaints about generalized behaviors are not direct attacks. But,
for example, a thread specifically calling out a member by name, and
speaking negatively about them, is a direct attack. Attack threads
will be deleted out of hand.
There is another kind of
direct attack, as well. The kind of post where someone drops in to
just say something like "You're all idiots". While not a
direct personal attack against an individual, it's still a direct
attack against the members on the thread.
There is a very
slim exception to this rule, noted mostly for history's sake. It only
applies to moderators. On occasion, a moderator may initiate a trial
of a member. Only moderators can initiate this process. If you have a
beef with a member being on this site, the appropriate place to bring
it up is with a moderator. In the unlikely event something like a
trial is necessary, they will make that determination.
Direct
attacks are personal attacks. They are not tolerated.
(Ex.:
A forum post saying "You're an idiot", or a debate with the
resolution "User123 should be kicked off the sit
-----------------------------------------------
