Creative Arts Disciplinary Action Model (DRAFT 1)


Below is the revised Creative Arts Disciplinary Action Model (Draft 1). Revised items can be seen in red with removals stricken through.

Please continue to give feedback, everything you’ve given me so far has been extremely helpful in defining holes I had not foreseen and the limitations of our disciplinary action scope of possibility. Thanks to those who have helped!

A final draft will be submitted to Talk on Monday, May 6th. Creative Arts will decide if it is ready to be voted on (and vote, if it is) at the regular May Creative Arts meeting (Thursday, May 9th).

Disciplinary Action Model - Draft 1.pdf (68.6 KB)



I love the new privacy section, but I have a suggestion (addition shown in bold).

To this end, doxxing outside of the CA leadership team (intentional reveal of a person’s identity) of disciplined or potentially disciplined persons shall be considered an offense (see Offense Types).

Paragraph 1 includes relevant SIGs in the leadership team. Paragraph 4 says the leadership team may inform the appropriate SIG. These two seem contradictory.

Question - what level is “accidental loss” of equipment? (I took it out into the workshop but I forgot where I set it down … I set it down in the Galley and it walked away …) Would loss be treated the same way as damage? If so, I recommend you state “loss/damage”.

Proof. I forgot whether proof was an AND situation or an OR situation. I suggest you clarify that in the model. And I still don’t understand this part. For instance, if I forget to pay for something, but no one complains … is it still an offense? Are computer logs part of the possible proof?

Also, I think that “offence” might be the British spelling.



Just reviving this thread so that its fresh on people’s minds. I’m going to release a final draft to vote on a week from today.