Site Charter

Introduction

Charter Purpose

O5 Command exists to facilitate three primary jobs for wiki staff. These are:

1. Site Discipline: Warning, tempbans, permabans
2. Site Maintenance: Deletions and projects
3. Policy Discussion: New rules and promotions

The following charter addresses protocol for these three jobs.

Charter Review

Optionally, once per year, the charter itself will be put up for review to ensure that this document remains relevant and useful to the site. At this time, by the will of a clear majority of staff (as defined by the charter's definition of majority at the time of the review), the charter can be changed and altered more easily and fluidly to help it come more into line with the current culture of the site.

This process is started by Administration at the beginning of July (though this may be delayed for up to two weeks to avoid overwhelming O5 if a current, serious discussion is taking place), and it will last until a majority of staff agree on the current text of the charter or to forgo the process until the following year.

Individual portions of the charter should be voted on during this time. New portions can be added to the charter, but they should probably have their own discussions, as this process would be more to correct problems with existing policies rather than create new ones.

Once discussion is complete, a designated Administrator will update the charter as needed.

Site Discipline

I. Site Discipline

Disciplinary matters on the wiki are governed by the Disciplinary Team; questions and concerns should be directed towards those users first. Disciplinary Team members should take initiative in locating, responding to, and documenting disciplinary infractions.

A. Making a Thread

1. Any member of Staff may make a thread in the Non-Disciplinary or Disciplinary subforums, or the equivalent forum, to document user behavior. These threads are for discussion of the user's behavior and documentation of pervasive behavioral trends on the user's part.
2. Any member of Staff may make a suggestion regarding possible disciplinary actions in response to a user's behavior. Actions will typically move as follows: warning (in-thread or in PMs), revocation of membership, short tempban (24/48/72 hours), long tempban (7 days/14 days/month), and permaban. Staff may suggest disciplinary actions anywhere along this spectrum in keeping with their judgment regarding the appropriate response to the offense(s) in question.

B. Disciplinary Action

1. Administrators are the only individuals capable of carrying out membership revocations or bans due to Wikidot permissions. As such, Administrator approval is necessary for bans. Rule of Three applies for site bans; a ban may take place once three Administrators are in favor of it in excess of any Administrators voting against it (e.g. if two Administrators vote against, five must vote in favor for the ban to go into effect, etc.)
   1. In the event that not enough Administrators are present, members of the Disciplinary Team can function in lieu of an Administrator for the purpose of voting for or against bans on wiki users. Note that one Administrator still must be present to enact the ban.
2. In the event of an emergency situation where a user on the wiki is committing rapid vandalism or must for some other reason be immediately removed from the site, an Administrator may execute a summary revocation of a user's membership with witnessing from any two staff members. Such Administrators must immediately make a thread in the Major User Issues subforum explaining the user's behavior and identifying the staff witnesses; this is to ensure adequate record-keeping.
   1. Misuse of summary revocation powers will be grounds for the immediate beginning of demotion proceedings.
3. Administrators will take staff input into consideration when executing bans and membership revocations.

C. Persistently Abusive Individuals

Users who have been permanently banned as part of normal disciplinary measures, but are continuing to cause extensive problems on the site, or are taking actions which require modification of disciplinary procedure for their case, are instead governed by the Persistently-Abusive Individuals Policy.

Site Maintenance

II. Site Maintenance

A. Wiki Deletion

Staff are to maintain all aspects of the Deletion Policies of the wiki, including:

• Starting and taking part in deletion votes, early deletion votes, and summary deletion votes;
• Executing or enabling the execution of deletions by attracting the attention of staff to low rated articles;
• Soliciting potential rewrites of deletion-eligible articles and pausing deletion votes as needed or as deemed appropriate to facilitate such rewrites;
• Ensuring appropriate documentation of deletions, including the SCP number, title when available, and number of negative votes.

B. Wiki Projects

Staff will take part in wiki projects, including rewrites, contests, limited or mass edits, and other jobs as befits their role in assigned teams.

Policy Issues

III. Policy Adjustments and Discussion

Adjustments to site rules and policies can be made by site staff according to the following procedures.

A. Policy Discussion

The Discussion Threads section of the Policy & Voting subforum is the place for discussion about possible policy changes. This is also the appropriate place for discussion of proposed changes to the SCP Wiki that are outside of the purview of a specific team, or require broader input from staff and users.

If a thread is posted within that subforum, an identical thread must be posted to the Staff Policy Discussions subforum on the SCP Wiki as a space where users are encouraged to leave any thoughts. The two must be linked to one another.

1. Staff are responsible for maintaining an awareness of and remaining up-to-date on discussions about changes to site policy.
2. Staff are responsible for contributing to discussions about site policy as they see fit.
3. Simultaneously, staff are required to maintain a degree of professionalism and emotional control during policy discussions, which can become heated at times. If necessary, staff may recuse themselves from conversations in order to regain composure.
4. A policy proposal must include information on exact amendments to be made, which guides are to be edited, and a list of people responsible for its implementation.

B. Voting

1. Voting is optional, to be used when consensus cannot be reached on a given topic. If objections to a proposal cannot be addressed through a Discussion Thread, any Active or Reserve member of Staff may call for a vote on the proposal to determine whether it should be implemented.
2. Voting threads should be created in the Voting Threads section of the Policy & Voting subforum.
3. Replies in voting threads are to consist entirely of yes, no or abstain votes, accompanied by limited explanation, unless the vote requires the selection of one or more options from a list. Abstentions count as participation in the vote without supporting any option. To ensure votes can be easily tallied, elaboration of one's position is to remain in the accompanying Discussion thread, not the Voting thread.
4. Only votes by active and reserve Staff will be counted.

C. Voting Periods

1. Votes will remain open for 1 week or until a majority of all current Active Staff members has voted for one option, whichever comes first.
2. Issues that have received less than the required amount of Staff participation may be extended by the use of an Administrative Fiat.
3. Issues which do not receive the minimum required level of Staff participation will fail by default.

D. Voting Requirements

1. Implementing changes to the Site Charter require a supermajority (60%) of votes to be in favor, and the participation of at least 50% of active Staff.
2. All other votes require a majority (>50%) of votes to be in favor, and the participation of at least 30% of active Staff.
3. Decisions between more than two options on a vote require a plurality of those who vote to be in favor in order to pass.
4. Reserve Staff may vote, but do not count towards the required level of active staff participation.

E. Ties and Failure

1. Yes/no votes or votes between two options that result in a tie will be sent back to the discussion stage, unless the vote is extended by an Administrator.
2. Votes between three or more options that result in a tie require a new vote to be created to choose between those two options.
3. Votes that fail may not be raised for vote again without significant changes to the proposal and additional discussion.

F. Execution & Enforcement

1. Upon successful voting, all parties responsible for the policy are also responsible for its implementation.
2. Policy changes altering on-site guides (e.g. Site Rules, Guide to Newcomers, etc) require a brief summary of the change (Motivation, Solution) to be posted onto that guide's discussion page.

Staff Rules and Rights

IV. Staff Rules and Rights

A. Staff Teams

1. Staff are recruited for specific teams. An explanation of the team-based staff structure can be found here. Staff will be expected to fulfill responsibilities associated with membership in those teams. Additionally, as necessary, staff should feel free to assist other staff members or work in other areas of the site. Staff wishing to help in such a manner should contact the team responsible for that area of site management to ensure cooperation and to avoid conflict with the responsible team.

B. Disciplinary Action

1. Staff members who frequently fail or refuse to vote on issues, violate site rules, or otherwise display behavior unbefitting a Staff member may be called up for review by the Administration.
2. Staff will be asked to weigh in on the behavior and judgment of the Staff member under consideration for disciplinary action in the discussion thread for that user.
3. If a separate voting thread is created to determine what disciplinary action is deemed appropriate for the given Staff member, individuals voting in that thread must have rank equal to or above the member in question, e.g. if a member of Operational Staff is being considered for disciplinary action, all members of OpStaff and above may vote, while Junior Staff may not vote.
4. In addition to this policy, any staff member may recommend demotion of another staff member they feel has abused their position. Please see the 'Demotion' tab for more information on the process.

C. Active/Reserve/Inactive Status

1. Staff activity levels are: "Active", "Reserve", and "Inactive", meaning active, semi-active, and inactive in the day-to-day running of the site. Everyday details of these roles are explained in-depth in the Activity Levels tab.
2. Staff members may move themselves between Active and Reserve statuses at will, as appropriate, and so long as they retain a sufficient level of activity.
3. So long as a Staff member is Reserve, their votes are not required to determine a quorum, and they may not hold the position of Team Captain. Reserve Staff are expected to limit their votes to: (1) subjects where they have the necessary knowledge and context or (2) situations where rapid action is useful.
4. So long as a Staff member is Inactive, their votes are not counted, nor required for an item to pass or fail, and they may not use the powers of their position, unless in an emergency where no other Staff member with appropriate powers are available.
5. A Staff member that the Administration determines to be Inactive will remain Inactive until the Administration determines that they are Active or Reserve again. Returning from the Inactive status usually requires a return to work before the Inactive status is lifted, as a show of good faith.
6. If a Staff member has been Inactive for an excessive amount of time, Administrators may remove them from Staff.

D. Absence and Abstinence

1. Staff members may choose to abstain from voting, but must state this in the vote thread. This will count toward active Staff participation requirements.
2. A Staff member who knows they will be less active, but will still be around to some extent, may inform the Staff of this and place themselves on Reserve status. They may also remove themselves from it if they return to Active.
3. If any Reserve or Active Staff member is absent or is not at least somewhat active, the Administrators may place them on Inactive status. A Team Captain may request that any staff member with low activity on their team be moved from Active or Reserve to Inactive status. Any Staff member who has gone without contact with the site for an atypical period of time will be placed on Inactive status.
4. Staff members may also place themselves on Inactive status if they wish, but Administrators must still determine when to remove their Inactive status.

E. Administrative Fiat

F. Staff Relationships and Adult Activity

1. Staff members found to have leveraged their position as staff to extort favours of a sexual nature from any user will be demoted and banned immediately, with no opportunity for appeal.
2. Staff are not to directly advertise their current position in the SCP Wiki’s staff structure on platforms where adult activity is expected or the norm. “I am [REDACTED], Admin of SCP Wiki” is unnecessary; “[REDACTED], writer at SCP Wiki” is more acceptable, if among other hobby listings. It’s not necessary to fully isolate one’s self identity between the Wiki with other platforms, but a level of division is expected and heavily encouraged.

Demotions

V. Demotions

Demotions rarely take place due to the nature of the site, but when they do, there is a set policy that must be followed. Please note that a discussion of demotion and a discussion of banning are separate topics, and a separate thread should be created for each.

A. Explaining Circumstances

1. If you feel that someone has failed to uphold their duties as a member of staff by breaking a site rule or abusing their position, you should discuss the issue with one of that staff member's peers. In this case, peer is defined as someone of equivalent rank or above. This discussion does not have to be in depth, but it's a good way to see if others feel similarly. If you feel that a staff member has harassed another member, please instead consult our harassment policy and contact a team member listed there instead to discuss the situation.
2. If that user agrees with you, the two of you should together approach either an administrator or a member of the disciplinary team. Explain the situation to them as the two of you see it. After this, your job is done.

B. Determination of Guilt

1. Once a situation has been brought to the attention of the administrators or disciplinary team, it is discussed briefly among present members of the team and administrative staff. If something is believed to have been blown out of proportion or is a direct, malicious attempt to get someone demoted, then those who brought the case should be questioned carefully. Malicious attempts to provoke demotion are grounds for demotion.
2. If the issue is found to be valid, then it is the duty of the Captain of the Disciplinary Team (in the case of non-administrators) or an administrator on the disciplinary team (in the case of administrators) to bring these charges to light on O5. The post should include:
   • A thorough description of the incident.
   • Logs, screenshots, or links to the evidence.
3. Once a post has been made on O5, it may be responded to by both the peers of the user and all members of the disciplinary team. Additional opinions and posts will be removed. These posts should include a clear opinion (or vote) on the guilt or innocence of the offender. When choosing guilt, please specific if they should be demoted from staff or demoted in rank.
4. While discussion is taking place, the user will have no authority on the wiki itself, but they will have the ability to post on O5 in their own defense. In the case of especially heinous abuses, the user's position on the site (administrator or moderator) will be held in abeyance until such a time as innocence or guilt is determined. The captain of disciplinary is responsible for determining if this is necessary, and they should contact an administrator to handle the removal of rank.
5. This post is open for discussion for no longer than one week.

C. Ruling

1. After the discussion has been resolved, a member of the Disciplinary Team or an administrator must call a halt to the discussion and determine the results.
2. If the user is determined to be at fault and should be demoted, then the demotion is carried out with one of two possibilities:
   • Full Removal: The user should be removed from all teams, the O5 site, and all staff lists. The author's page should be updated to reflect this.
   • Rank Demotion: The user's place on their teams and rank on staff lists should be corrected. The author's page should be updated to reflect this change.
   • Censure: The user's authority is held in abeyance for a period of time determined by staff, as befitting the circumstances surrouding their censure. They may not take actions as staff members, cannot act with staff authority or voice, and cannot vote on policy measures, but they may still participate in policy discussions in which their knowledge or experiences are relevant. Any rank they hold will be removed until the time period has concluded.
3. If the user is determined to not be at fault, all their powers and position on the site will be restored, if held in abeyance, and they will return to full duty if they so wish.

As a final note: it's obvious that calling someone out or attempting to get them demoted will lead to hard feelings. That's just part of life. No one likes being called out, and no one likes calling someone out. However, if you feel that there's been a severe problem which calls for demotion, you must contact either a member of disciplinary or an administrator to discuss it.