draft banning procedure

[Bruce Scanlon]

Please give this an eyeball before I post to forums...

First draft


Banning is a complaint-driven process. Banning is an extreme sanction and not to be taken lightly.  Any member of Kiwiburn Inc. may make a complaint. Incidents worthy of discussion will be egregious violations of the “3 rules” of paddock behaviour and reason to believe that these violations are not due to exceptional circumstances but instead representative of a pattern of behaviour of the Person in Question (PIQ).

1) No Intimidating, aggressive or antisocial behaviour.
 No gang patches, weapons, dogs
 No physical, sexual or otherwise threatening behaviour

2) Respect other people and their property
 People can ask you to leave their camp at any time, you must go.
 Ask permission before using other people’s stuff
 No burning, destruction, defacement or theft of other people’s property/art, or that of the foliage or infrastructure on the paddock.
 All music/noise levels should fit with the community, as advised/directed by Site Manager in conjunction with town planning.

3) Respect the organizers (respect for properly constituted Kiwiburn Inc. authority) in their pursuit of the above 2 points.


1) Private discussion by Excom.  Privacy is to ensure privacy, safety and legal protection from accusations of Slander/Libel of PIQ, anyone involved in PIQ incidents, and people discussing PIQ.

2) If Excom favor banning then all reasonable efforts to contact PIQ.  Easy if ticket bought via internet as we have email.  Easy if PIQ was trespassed and fulfilled their legal duty to provide name and address information upon request.  Friends of PIQ may be contacted without stating reason, or message may be put on Kiwiburn Forums/Facebook asking for contact from PIQ if the easy ways of contacting PIQ don’t work.

3) Person in question given 30 days to respond.  PIQ may request public discussion on Kiwiburn forums.

4) Final Excom decision.  No bans are to be permanent.  Duration of ban to be 1 or 2 years maximum.  Thereafter, PIQ may submit request to attend Kiwiburn to Excom.  Requests with documentation from or opportunity to contact persons other than the PIQ, credentialed where appropriate, will enjoy greater consideration.

5) Notification to PIQ.

6) PIQ may appeal decision in writing to excom with support of at least 3 Kiwiburn Inc. members.  PIQ may request public discussion on Kiwiburn forums.

7) Excom to reconsider decision based on appeal.

8) Excom decision with notification to PIQ.

9) PIQ may request discussion and vote on banning at AGM.

10) Final check on power of Excom is right of community to call for vote of no confidence on Excom members at AGM.

[Hana Tuwhare]

3) Person in question given 30 days to respond.  PIQ may request public discussion on Kiwiburn forums.

What if they would not like the discussion to go public and would like to explain themselves to excom?

--
Sent from my iNus

[Bruce Scanlon]

Yes, that's how I thought it should be, sorry if it wasn't clear.  I will redraft...

[Kathy Guidi]

I'm all okay with this and agree with Hana's point below.   Must admit it will be an arduous process for us but hopefully will give due process to the PIQ!

On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Hana Tuwhare <hanat...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Bruce Scanlon]

Second draft-- mostly the same as the first, but I tried to make bits clearer and indicate more clearly how the community can have input.


 Banning is a complaint and offense driven process.

 Banning is an extreme sanction and not to be taken lightly. 
 Any member of Kiwiburn Inc. may make a complaint.

 Incidents worthy of discussion will be egregious violations of the “3 rules” of paddock behaviour AND reason to believe that these violations are not due to exceptional circumstances but instead representative of a pattern of behaviour of the Person in Question (PIQ), and that exposure to the Kiwiburn community and attempts to educate them have not or will not change the pattern of behaviour.

1) No Intimidating, aggressive or antisocial behaviour.
 No gang patches, weapons, dogs
 No physical, sexual or otherwise threatening behaviour

2) Respect other people and their property

 People can ask you to leave their camp at any time; you must go.

 Ask permission before using other people’s stuff
 No burning, destruction, defacement or theft of other people’s property/art, or that of the foliage or infrastructure on the paddock.
 All music/noise levels should fit with the community, as advised/directed by Site Manager in conjunction with town planning.

3) Respect the organizers (respect for properly constituted Kiwiburn Inc. authority) in their pursuit of the above 2 points.

1) Private discussion by Excom.  Privacy is to ensure safety and legal protection from accusations of Slander/Libel of PIQ, anyone involved in PIQ incidents, and people discussing PIQ.

2) If Excom favor banning then all reasonable efforts are made to contact PIQ.  Easy if ticket bought via internet as we have email.  Easy if PIQ was trespassed and fulfilled their legal duty to provide name and address information upon request.  Friends of PIQ may be contacted without stating reason, or message may be put on Kiwiburn Forums/Facebook asking for contact from PIQ if the easy ways of contacting PIQ don’t work.

3) PIQ given 30 days to respond to Excom.  Discussion to remain private unless PIQ requests public discussion on Kiwiburn forums.

4) Final Excom decision.  No bans are to be permanent.  Duration of ban to be 1 or 2 annual events maximum.  Thereafter, to remove the ban PIQ may submit request to attend Kiwiburn to Excom.  Evidence-based requests (documentation from or opportunity to contact persons/entities other than the PIQ, credentialed where appropriate) will enjoy greater consideration.

5) Notification to PIQ.

6) PIQ may appeal decision in writing to Excom with support of at least 3 Kiwiburn Inc. members.  Discussion to remain private unless PIQ requests public discussion on Kiwiburn forums.

7) Excom to reconsider decision based on appeal.

8) Excom decision with notification to PIQ.

9) If PIQ feels Excom does not represent opinion of Kiwiburn Inc. membership, PIQ may request discussion and vote on banning at Annual General Meeting (AGM).

10) Final check on power of Excom is right of any member to call for vote of no confidence on Excom members at any meeting, including AGM.

[Hippie Tim]

I think we should do away with the "3 rules" concept, I think rather it would be a much better idea to cite people as compromising the 10 principles and have internal policies about what these compromises might entail. Having "3 rules" doesn't sit very well with me and all it is really is a list of ways that people may infringe on the 10 principles.

Also not sure if they should have apply to gain entrance after there ban, I think once that time is over they should be free to do as they will.

My 2c.

[Cass Edwards]

I agree that just keeping the 10 principles is simple, but I like the
focus of the 3 rules to make it very clear what is considered a
banning offense out of the principles, many of which aren't really
relevant to the ban process.

I think them having to apply to gain entrance after a ban is a waste
of ExCom time and likely to be a HUGE drama causing element so I agree
with Tim but not for the reasons he looks to be having. I think a ban
should be permanent, and the difference being that a person can be
asked to leave the event should be allowed to come back next year
(we've already got this potential situation with one attendee from
this year, who is not being considered for banning, but was asked to
leave the event) - this to me is a temporary ban, and already exists.
I can just see major issues with those being banned causing a huge
fuss about being allowed to attend in future years. If you are going
to have to go to the very extreme measure of banning, it's not
undertaken lightly and should be permanent.

I feel very strongly about this and think it would be a huge mistake
for the ban process to be only temporary and essentially a waste of
time and nothing more than a slap on the wrist and I think the
committee will be getting itself into far more trouble than it's worth
if the ban is only temporary.

Cass

[Bruce Scanlon]

Thanks for the feedback.  I have the three rules there because Chad thought it was important enough to state them in the draft operational documents he sent me.

I like stating them because they are obvious common sense things that people can't really help but agree with.

On the other hand, we could put in the 10 principles, with the 3 rules, rewritten as "examples" of what breaking the community principles might look like.

In fact adding the 10 principles makes the "rules" for behaviour even tighter because it adds more descriptions of behaviour from which someone could vary.
======

As far as applying to return goes, I think that's really important.  Half of the people we are
talking about banning seem to be suffering from long standing mental illness-- there is no reason to think that something like that is going to just go away after they are gone for a year or two.  If they really want to come back I would want to see good evidence that something fundamental has changed with their brain chemistry or whatever causal agent we would like to attribute their behaviour to.

I agree with Cass-- it's not really worth the bother to go through the process of sending someone away for a year or two if they can come back without a review process.

If they can just come back after the ban then I would like to see the banning period able to be much longer than 2 years.  Maybe 20 would satisfy me.

The 2 year max and then review is meant to be a compromise between these two ideas-- the ban doesn't have to be that long, and 2 years isn't considering 2 of the people we are talking about banning missed a year or two here or there of their own free will.

[Karl Matthews]

Maybe if we had a scale to the offence?

Say if you were getting banned for a series of offences which aren't criminal we could decide on a time frame, but reserve the right to perminatly ban for offences of a serious criminal nature ie sexual or violate.

I think the 3 rules are just fine. 

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Cass Edwards <ca...@wildilocks.com> wrote:

[Kathy Guidi]

I re-worked the procedures to make it flow better and hopefully be a bit clearer on the process.  

I think the three rules are important to list as it spells out clearly what is to be tolerated or not and this is something that we can put on the website and/or somehow make known to all participants.

I also think the PIQ should have to re-petition the ExCom after the ban is over.   While this does seem like an extreme procedure, it may not really play out that way -- some folks will just go away and never be heard from again while others will continue to be known within the community and the ExCom will probably have a good idea of what's happened to that person during the intervening banning period and be able to quickly make a decision.

**************************************************************************

 

KIWIBURN INCORPORATED
BANNING PROCEDURES

{DRAFT}

 

SUMMARY:

Banning is a complaint and offense driven process.    Banning is an extreme sanction and not to be taken lightly.   Any member of Kiwiburn Inc. may make a complaint. Incidents worthy of discussion will be egregious violations of the “3 rules” of paddock behaviour AND reason to believe that these violations are not due to exceptional circumstances but instead representative of a pattern of behaviour of the Person in Question (PIQ), and that exposure to the Kiwiburn community and attempts to educate them have not or will not change the pattern of behaviour.

 

THREE RULES OF PADDOCK BEHAVIOUR:

1) No Intimidating, aggressive or antisocial behaviour.

-  No gang patches, weapons, dogs
-  No physical, sexual or otherwise threatening behaviour

2) Respect other people and their property

-  People can ask you to leave their camp at any time; you must go.

-  Ask permission before using other people’s stuff
-  No burning, destruction, defacement or theft of other people’s property/art, or that of the foliage or infrastructure on the paddock.
 - All music/noise levels should fit with the community, as advised/directed by Site Manager in conjunction with town planning.

3) Respect the organizers (respect for properly constituted Kiwiburn Inc. authority) in their pursuit of the above 2 points.

PROCESS FOR INITIATING A BAN

1) Private discussion by Excom. (Privacy is to ensure safety and legal protection from accusations of Slander/Libel of PIQ, anyone involved in PIQ incidents, and people discussing PIQ).

2a) If Excom favors banning then all reasonable efforts are made to contact the PIQ by letter or email notifying them of potential ban from future Kiwiburn festival(s).   (Easy if ticket bought via internet as we have email.  Easy if PIQ was trespassed and fulfilled their legal duty to provide name and address information upon request.  Friends of PIQ may be contacted without stating reason, or message may be put on Kiwiburn Forums/Facebook asking for contact from PIQ if the easy ways of contacting PIQ don’t work).

2b) PIQ given 30 days to respond to Excom.  Discussion to remain private unless PIQ requests public discussion on Kiwiburn forums.

3a) Final Excom decision.  (No bans are to be permanent.  Duration of  ban to be 1 or 2 annual events maximum).

3b) Final Notification to PIQ by email or letter.

 

TO GET REINSTATED TO KIWIBURN:

 

To return to Kiwiburn after the ban, the PIQ may submit a written request  to the Excom.  Evidence-based requests (documentation from or opportunity to contact persons/entities other than the PIQ, credentialed where appropriate) will enjoy greater consideration.

1) PIQ may petition the ExCom in writing with support of at least 3 Kiwiburn Inc. members.  Discussion to remain private unless PIQ requests public discussion on Kiwiburn forums.

2) Excom to consider decision based on appeal.

3) Excom makes decision with notification to PIQ.

4) If PIQ feels Excom does not represent the opinion of the Kiwiburn Inc membership, PIQ may request discussion and vote on banning at Annual General Meeting (AGM).

5) Final check on the power of the Excom is the right of any member to call for a vote of no confidence on Excom members at any meeting, including AGM.

[Firey Emz]

Hi,

Thanks for all your work on this Bruce looks great. I like the 3 rules too. I think the part where the PIQ has to have 3 momintators to requesst readmission is really important, and negates the need for the time of ban maybe

Im away now until tuesday at womad  so please excuse me if im not online much,

thanks emma
.

[Hana Tuwhare]

-  People can ask you to leave their camp at any time; you must go.

This is the only thing that sits a little funny. Can we say that people can ask you to leave their camp at any time if they feel uncomfortable/threatened? Or something along those lines? Or that assumed under the heading ""2) Respect other people and their property""

[Bruce Scanlon]

>-  People can ask you to leave their camp at any time; you must go.

>This is the only thing that sits a little funny. Can we say that people can ask you to leave their camp at any time if they feel uncomfortable/threatened? Or something along those lines? Or that assumed under the heading ""2) Respect other people and their property""

I have been thinking about this for a bit Hana...  I'm still not quite sure if I understand where you are coming from exactly.  It seems to me even if people are asking someone to leave their camp for the "wrong" reasons it is still because they are feeling uncomfortable.

I have this weird movie running through my head where the site manager is asking someone why they kicked someone else out of their camp, and the kicker-outer is saying, "because he was being a dick" and the site manager is saying, hmmm, no sorry that's not an OK excuse.  Anything else?  and the person says, "I hate asians, that's why I told him to leave," and the site manager says, no, that's not cool, anything else?  And the person says, "well, I just felt uncomfortable" and the site manager says, OK then, you can ask him to leave.

But I think that shows maybe I don't understand you more than it means anything in particular...  can you help me out with this?

[Bruce Scanlon]

Emma, hmm, yeah, no time given for the ban?  But it's only 1 or 2 events max anyway before they can reapply?

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Firey Emz <fire...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Bruce Scanlon]

I have been getting some feedback privately about this process.

The feedback is generally that the process is too weak.  

Specifically I have heard that the possible banning period (1-2 years) might be too short, and that it would require the excom to endlessly deal with someone who kept reapplying, and that a single violent incident (for instance with our knife wielder this year) should be enough for a ban-- no pattern of behaviour required.

What do you all think about that?

Too weak?

[Hana Tuwhare]

I have been thinking about this for a bit Hana...  I'm still not quite sure if I understand where you are coming from exactly.  It seems to me even if people are asking someone to leave their camp for the "wrong" reasons it is still because they are feeling uncomfortable.

You understood me correctly, now that i look at it again, I can't really see what my issue was... Ignore me!

[Hippie Tim]

So it still doesn't sit with me well at all this whole rule thing, and the whole banning thing in general really, but I do understand that it will make life easier for us all, I'm trying to find a balance here that I'm happy with.

A lot of my arguments are pure semantics, I think the way it's written right now makes us look like a bunch of authoritarian rule enforcing meanies, which is not what I want to do, nor be seen as doing.

I think that some changes to the structure will end in roughly the same results and seem a lot less like the default world norms of making and enforcing rules.

We have the 10 principles, they do a very good job of spelling out what our community is and isn't about. I think they spell out the guidelines of how community interaction is meant to go quite well. I think they should be the basic overarching and guide for what is "allowed" and "not allowed" in our community. Making up 3 rules that are based around the principles seems like a silly idea to me. Rather I think the idea of having a list of things that would be considered as against our guiding principles (essentially the 3 rules only reworded slightly) would be better.

Also I absolutely think that people should not need to apply to come back, if they cause problems again they will be known and it will not be hard to ask them to leave. It makes our lives in general a tad bit easier but I think that they should all be given a fair chance to prove themselves through there actions. I do not want my activities on the excom to include acting like the local parole board to see if our banees are ready to join the community again, instead they should be given the benefit of the doubt and be aloud to make mistakes, despite the fact that that could make our lives a little more difficult. In reality we're only talking about a very small handful of people here, it's not going to be that big of a deal.

Here is my example of how I would rewrite the procedures:

 Banning is a complaint driven process. 

 Banning is an extreme sanction and not to be taken lightly.  
 Any member of Kiwiburn Inc. may make a complaint. 

 Incidents worthy of discussion will be egregious actions contrary to the 10 principles AND reason to believe that these actions are not due to exceptional circumstances but instead representative of a pattern of behaviour of the Person in Question (PIQ), and that exposure to the Kiwiburn community and attempts to educate them have not or will not change the pattern of behaviour.

Examples of such actions include but are not limited to:

1) Intimidating, aggressive or antisocial behaviour.
 Gang patches, weapons, dogs
 Physical, sexual or otherwise threatening behaviour

2) Disrespecting other people and their property

 People can ask you to leave their camp at any time.

 Ask permission before using other people’s stuff
 Burning, destruction, defacement or theft of other people’s property/art, or that of the foliage or infrastructure on the paddock.
 All music/noise levels should fit with the community, as advised/directed by Site Manager in conjunction with town planning.

Please respect the organizers in their pursuit of the above 2 points.

After complaints have been established the following procedures will be followed:

1) Private discussion by Excom.  Privacy is to ensure safety and legal protection from accusations of Slander/Libel of PIQ, anyone involved in PIQ incidents, and people discussing PIQ.

2) If Excom favor banning then all reasonable efforts are made to contact PIQ.  Easy if ticket bought via internet as we have email.  Easy if PIQ was trespassed and fulfilled their legal duty to provide name and address information upon request.  Friends of PIQ may be contacted without stating reason, or message may be put on Kiwiburn Forums/Facebook asking for contact from PIQ if the easy ways of contacting PIQ don’t work.

3) PIQ given 30 days to respond to Excom.  Discussion to remain private unless PIQ requests public discussion on Kiwiburn forums.

4) Final Excom decision.  No bans are to be permanent.  Duration of ban to be 1 or 2 annual events maximum.

5) Notification to PIQ.

6) PIQ may appeal decision in writing to Excom with support of at least 3 Kiwiburn Inc. members.  Discussion to remain private unless PIQ requests public discussion on Kiwiburn forums.

7) Excom to reconsider decision based on appeal and community feedback if any.

8) Excom decision with notification to PIQ.

9) If PIQ feels Excom does not represent opinion of Kiwiburn Inc. membership, PIQ may request discussion and vote on banning at Annual General Meeting (AGM).

10) Final check on power of Excom is right of any member to call for vote of no confidence on Excom members at any meeting, including AGM. 

-------------------

So yea that's my take it, as I said, mostly semantical changes, but I really think they are important as it sets us up as a community driven protection rather then making us look like enforcers of some doctrine, aka "the 3 rules".

Comments?

[Kathy Guidi]

Hey Tim,
Appreciate your point of view. 

I read through your email but couldn't quite figure out what wording you changed as it's not easily identifiable.  The only thing I can see that you reworded was you changed   "Three Rules of Paddock Behaviour"  to  "Examples of such actions include but are not limited to"

Did you change anything else?   If not, then you are basically supporting the requirement for PIQ to have to petition the excom to come back.  That's what items 6-10 are all about below (unless I misunderstood Bruce's original intent).   

-K

[Bruce Scanlon]

> Rather I think the idea of having a list of things that would be considered as against our guiding principles (essentially the 3 rules only reworded slightly) would be better.

Fine with me.  To put in the 10 principles actually makes the theoretically possible offenses more numerous.

Not fine with me to just let people come back.

The policy I am trying to achieve is one that is balanced along several points.  The very short possible banning period (only 1 or 2 years) in the draft I wrote is balanced against the need to re-apply.

If the need to re-apply is dropped then the possible length of the ban must be increased.

I understand you don't want to be a parole board-- but that's actually much less work than having to oversee kicking someone out who is on a short leash because they are a newly returned banned person, and they have other people that they are with, and they have some stuff set up that needs to be taken down, and they don't mind making a big show for an audience of fascinated and possibly appalled participants...

One other way to get rid of the need to re-apply is to make all bans permanent.  There are people who have written me privately asking for just such a rule.  And honestly, I would cheerfully go along with this.

But the right to reapply is a concession to other opinions in our community that bans need not be permanent.

More axes of balance.

So yeah, happy to rewrite with your take on the examples, not rules, following from the principles. 

Not happy to just drop need to reapply without balancing that in some way, increasing possible ban length to a good long time, or making all bans permanent are two things that come to mind, but I am happy to hear alternate suggestions...?

Back to you sir :-)

On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Hippie Tim <fuzzy...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Hana Tuwhare]

What about the option for for a life time ban or a banned period (of 1 or 2 years), it would be a case by case basis. Just a thought.

[Pete Wyatt]

I would vote for a need to re apply to be admitted to our community (you have proved that we can not trust you to behave in the correct manner) rather than any permanent ban, this does give a ban for as long as we wish

[Ash Easton]

i also vote for a need to re-apply after a minimum ban period which could be decided on a case-by-case basis. once people have proven they are not able or willing to conduct themselves in a manner consistent with the 10 principals, it should be their prerogative to prove that they are willing and able to uphold the 10 principals after the ban period.

[Bruce Scanlon]

OK Tim unless you have some further thoughts, I can make those changes you suggested about the principles and leave the ban period and re-apply as written, and then post to the forums to see what the community thinks.

[Bruce Scanlon]

thanks for weighing in Ash :-)

[Hippie Tim]

Yea sorry I'd love to be thinking more and talking more about it but right now my brainspace is full to the brim, hopefully next week I'll be more available for Kiwiburn stuff but right now CHCH Temple is taking priority.

Hippie.

[chris hankins]

jeeez tim

forget about the banning process and concintrate on what your doing

we'll figure the rest out

--
http://internationalartsmegacrew.com/

[Kathy Guidi]

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Bruce Scanlon <bruce....@gmail.com> wrote:

OK Tim unless you have some further thoughts, I can make those changes you suggested about the principles and leave the ban period and re-apply as written, and then post to the forums to see what the community thinks.

Can you use the format of the document I already sent please?  It just has the numbering different and clear categories to make it easier to read.     : - )


 

[Bruce Scanlon]

I copied your re-write in the same post as the document, I assumed they were the same.

It's up on the forums now if anyone wants to comment, or check to see how it is numbered...

http://kiwiburn.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=9033&sid=e820b6bd9289213a9c11046daf454a27#9033

[Pete Wyatt]

there has been some discussions on the regional forums about similar problems with banning people and how to tell them, I liked this simple one

We need to ask you to leave our community.  Radical Inclusion only goes so far.

You are no longer welcome here.

You have burned and hurt and upset enough people, and your trust currency is negative.

[Mark Stirling]

Yes you might remember I solicited a good deal of feedback on this
issue from the RCs a couple months back. As a result there was going
to be a pod discussion on the issue at the summit. Looking forward to
seeing the minutes.

I take it from this thread that the procedure and implementation are
still some time away. Ym

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *KIWIBURN INCORPORATED
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BANNING PROCEDURES *
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *{DRAFT}*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *SUMMARY:*

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Banning is a complaint and offense driven process. Banning
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is an extreme sanction and not to be taken lightly. Any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> member of Kiwiburn Inc. may make a complaint. Incidents worthy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussion will be egregious violations of the “3 rules” of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> paddock
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behaviour AND reason to believe that these violations are not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> due to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exceptional circumstances but instead representative of a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pattern of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behaviour of the Person in Question (PIQ), and that exposure
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kiwiburn community and attempts to educate them have not or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will not change
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the pattern of behaviour.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *THREE RULES OF PADDOCK BEHAVIOUR:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *1) No Intimidating, aggressive or antisocial behaviour.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - No gang patches, weapons, dogs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - No physical, sexual or otherwise threatening behaviour
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *2) Respect other people and their property*

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - People can ask you to leave their camp at any time; you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> must go.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Ask permission before using other people’s stuff
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - No burning, destruction, defacement or theft of other
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people’s property/art, or that of the foliage or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> infrastructure on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> paddock.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - All music/noise levels should fit with the community, as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> advised/directed by Site Manager in conjunction with town
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> planning.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *3) Respect the organizers (respect for properly constituted

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kiwiburn Inc. authority) in their pursuit of the above 2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> points.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PROCESS FOR INITIATING A BAN*

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Private discussion by Excom. (Privacy is to ensure safety
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and legal protection from accusations of Slander/Libel of PIQ,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anyone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> involved in PIQ incidents, and people discussing PIQ).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2a) If Excom favors banning then all reasonable efforts are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> made to contact the PIQ by letter or email notifying them of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> potential ban
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from future Kiwiburn festival(s). (Easy if ticket bought
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> via internet as we have email. Easy if PIQ was trespassed and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fulfilled
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their legal duty to provide name and address information upon
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> request.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Friends of PIQ may be contacted without stating reason, or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> message may be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> put on Kiwiburn Forums/Facebook asking for contact from PIQ if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the easy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ways of contacting PIQ don’t work).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2b) PIQ given 30 days to respond to Excom. Discussion to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remain private unless PIQ requests public discussion on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kiwiburn forums.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3a) Final Excom decision. (No bans are to be permanent.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Duration of ban to be 1 or 2 annual events maximum).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3b) Final Notification to PIQ by email or letter.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * *
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *TO GET REINSTATED TO KIWIBURN:*

[Bruce Scanlon]

>I take it from this thread that the procedure and implementation are
still some time away. Ym

Actually I think this has run its course on the forums without modification of the procedure I posted, so it's time for us to vote on the final procedure and then implement.