Poetic Justice

[wingspan33]

Again, from my limited knowledge of the law, I don't believe a law was broken. If you know more, then please post it.

To Free and Bobk,

I've been doing some research on the legality of the attack posts made against Sara (a resident of Oregon at the time).

Here's Oregon's State law on Harassment :

Oregon State Law § 166.065 Harassment

(1) A person commits the crime of harassment if the person intentionally:
(a) Harasses or annoys another person by:
. . .
(B) Publicly insulting such other person by abusive words . . . in a
manner intended and likely to provoke a violent response . . .

(2)(a) A person is criminally liable for harassment if the person knowingly permits any telephone or electronic device under the persons control to be used in violation of
subsection (1) of this section.

(3) Harassment is a Class B misdemeanor [a crime - involving possible jail time].

Besides the person(s) doing the harassing, there seems to be section (2)(a) that can make the Internet Provider criminally liable, if they "knowingly" allow one of their clients to act in
a harassing manner. This is where informing them can stop future violations.

I've also dug up the involved internet provider: Charter Communications/Cable TV in Lakeview, OR. I plan on calling them with addition information to see if one or more people were involved. From what I know presently, they use "dynamic" IP addresses, which means the people using a specific IP address can indeed change (but it isn't necessarily a requirement). "Static" IP addresses are assigned to specific customers.

Perhaps more later. It's late and time to hit the hay.
customers, but that is irrelevant in this situation (as far as I know so far).

[Bob Kuczewski]

As Free has suggested, I've looked up the Terms of Service agreed to when people sign up with the US Hawks. These were essentially the "boiler plate" terms created automatically by the phpBB software when I created the forum back in August of 2010, and I haven't reviewed them since.

By accessing “US Hawks Hang Gliding Association” (hereinafter “we”, “us”, “our”, “US Hawks Hang Gliding Association”, “http://ushawks.org/forum”), you agree to be legally bound by the following terms. If you do not agree to be legally bound by all of the following terms then please do not access and/or use “US Hawks Hang Gliding Association”. We may change these at any time and we’ll do our utmost in informing you, though it would be prudent to review this regularly yourself as your continued usage of “US Hawks Hang Gliding Association” after changes mean you agree to be legally bound by these terms as they are updated and/or amended.

Our forums are powered by phpBB (hereinafter “they”, “them”, “their”, “phpBB software”, “www.phpbb.com”, “phpBB Group”, “phpBB Teams”) which is a bulletin board solution released under the “General Public License” (hereinafter “GPL”) and can be downloaded from http://www.phpbb.com. The phpBB software only facilitates internet based discussions, the phpBB Group are not responsible for what we allow and/or disallow as permissible content and/or conduct. For further information about phpBB, please see: https://www.phpbb.com/.

You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-orientated or any other material that may violate any laws be it of your country, the country where “US Hawks Hang Gliding Association” is hosted or International Law. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned, with notification of your Internet Service Provider if deemed required by us. The IP address of all posts are recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that “US Hawks Hang Gliding Association” have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time should we see fit. As a user you agree to any information you have entered to being stored in a database. While this information will not be disclosed to any third party without your consent, neither “US Hawks Hang Gliding Association” nor phpBB shall be held responsible for any hacking attempt that may lead to the data being compromised.

In reviewing the posts that we've been discussing, it's clear that they violated the existing US Hawks Terms of Service. For that reason, the entire topic containing the violating posts has been temporarily removed from public view. If we decide to follow those terms of service, then I suspect that we'll be removing a lot of additional information from this forum (I believe, for example, that many of Tad's posts are in clear violation). We can also decide to change our own Terms of Service to make them fit what we want the US Hawks to be. That's an important discussion for the Board when it is formed. Until then, if anyone sees a post that they feel is in violation of the Terms of Service, please flag it with the "Report" button. Thanks.

Again, from my limited knowledge of the law, I don't believe a law was broken. If you know more, then please post it.

To Free and Bobk,

I've been doing some research on the legality of the attack posts made against Sara (a resident of Oregon at the time).

Here's Oregon's State law on Harassment :

Oregon State Law § 166.065 Harassment

(1) A person commits the crime of harassment if the person intentionally:
(a) Harasses or annoys another person by:
. . .
(B) Publicly insulting such other person by abusive words . . . in a
manner intended and likely to provoke a violent response . . .

(2)(a) A person is criminally liable for harassment if the person knowingly permits any telephone or electronic device under the persons control to be used in violation of subsection (1) of this section.

(3) Harassment is a Class B misdemeanor [a crime - involving possible jail time].

Besides the person(s) doing the harassing, there seems to be section (2)(a) that can make the Internet Provider criminally liable, if they "knowingly" allow one of their clients to act in a harassing manner. This is where informing them can stop future violations.

I've also dug up the involved internet provider: Charter Communications/Cable TV in Lakeview, OR. I plan on calling them with addition information to see if one or more people were involved. From what I know presently, they use "dynamic" IP addresses, which means the people using a specific IP address can indeed change (but it isn't necessarily a requirement). "Static" IP addresses are assigned to specific customers.

While the offending posts clearly violated our Terms of Service, it's not clear (at least to me) that they violated the Oregon law that wingspan33 quoted. I haven't read the entire law, but of the parts quoted, this section seems the most likely violation:

(B) Publicly insulting such other person by abusive words . . . in a manner intended and likely to provoke a violent response . . .

The violation is not clear because of the phrase "in a manner intended and likely to provoke a violent response". That section uses the word "and" which means that the insults must be both intended and likely to provoke a violent response. The reliance on intention seems to make that law difficult to apply. I doubt that whoever made those posts was looking to provoke a violent response from Sara - especially without giving their real names. Were they intending for Sara to punch her computer? But this is clearly a gray area, and if anyone sees a post that they feel is in violation of any law, please flag it with the "Report" button. Thanks.

Finally, it's also not clear (again, to me) how the Oregon law relates to the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

There's a slippery slope when we attempt to regulate what people can and cannot say, and that's been my objection to just removing posts without some form of due process that includes thoughtful review and discussion. But the law is the law, and we must honor it.

The US Hawks Hang Gliding Association is intended to become an association of pilots who want to work together to build and enjoy a national hang gliding association of their own making. We will have to establish policies that fit what we want this association to be. That's our challenge and I welcome everyone who wants to participate.

[Free]

In reviewing the posts that we've been discussing, it's clear that they violated the existing US Hawks Terms of Service. For that reason, the entire topic containing the violating posts has been temporarily removed from public view. If we decide to follow those terms of service, then I suspect that we'll be removing a lot of additional information from this forum (I believe, for example, that many of Tad's posts are in clear violation). We can also decide to change our own Terms of Service to make them fit what we want the US Hawks to be. That's an important discussion for the Board when it is formed. Until then, if anyone sees a post that they feel is in violation of the Terms of Service, please flag it with the "Report" button.

Bob, you've stated several times that you didn't trust yourself on the "slippery slope" of censoring people. I have problems in some of your logic but in this case I would have to agree.

This would be the place to implement a panel of accountable members, or a "Board" if you like, to review and moderate this discussion group.

This should not be left up to a single tone deaf dictator, like a Davis Straub or Jack Ax.

If this can be reasonably worked out in some fair configuration, I may volunteer to this task, along with others.
Accountability to actions taken would need to be key in this endeavor.
Thoughts?

[Bill Cummings]

In reviewing the posts that we've been discussing, it's clear that they violated the existing US Hawks Terms of Service. For that reason, the entire topic containing the violating posts has been temporarily removed from public view. If we decide to follow those terms of service, then I suspect that we'll be removing a lot of additional information from this forum (I believe, for example, that many of Tad's posts are in clear violation). We can also decide to change our own Terms of Service to make them fit what we want the US Hawks to be. That's an important discussion for the Board when it is formed. Until then, if anyone sees a post that they feel is in violation of the Terms of Service, please flag it with the "Report" button.

Bob, you've stated several times that you didn't trust yourself on the "slippery slope" of censoring people. I have problems in some of your logic but in this case I would have to agree.

This would be the place to implement a panel of accountable members, or a "Board" if you like, to review and moderate this discussion group.

This should not be left up to a single tone deaf dictator, like a Davis Straub or Jack Ax.

If this can be reasonably worked out in some fair configuration, I may volunteer to this task, along with others.
Accountability to actions taken would need to be key in this endeavor.
Thoughts?

________________________________________________________________________
Free,
Very good point:
Quote Free---
“Bob, you've stated several times that you didn't trust yourself on the "slippery slope" of censoring people. I have problems in some of your logic but in this case I would have to agree.

This would be the place to implement a panel of accountable members, or a "Board" if you like, to review and moderate this discussion group.

This should not be left up to a single tone deaf dictator, like a Davis Straub or Jack Ax.

If this can be reasonably worked out in some fair configuration, I may volunteer to this task, along with others.
Accountability to actions taken would need to be key in this endeavor.
Thoughts?” END QUOTE!

We have been casting around looking for a topic for a practicing board of directors to work on and I think this too would be the place to settle on this topic due to its importance.

It’s late here now so I’ll try to summon up my two cents worth tomorrow before my guests arrive for the supper bowl game.

All others in on this panel or practice board, I second Free’s suggestion (motion) to alight on this topic for our first discussion.
Thoughts?

[Bob Kuczewski]

Great ideas Bill and Warren. You've got my vote "to alight on this topic for our first discussion" as well.



I think it's a fitting result of this long discussion that we use some of these issues as topics for the trial Board of Directors. I propose that when we convene the first Trial Board, we do so in honor of Sara. It's unfortunate that the US Hawks was still too embryonic to really be helpful to Sara four years ago. But the vigorous participation that we've seen in this last year - and even in this topic - gives me hope that we'll be there for the next young person who turns their eyes to the sky.

Bill, I look forward to your leadership on this. Thanks for stepping up.     

[brianscharp]

Yeah, now is the time to start deleting anything connected to Sara.

I never said anything about ". . . deleting anything connected with Sara." I suggested archiving the Lakeview Hawks forum somewhere on this site.

In reviewing the posts that we've been discussing, it's clear that they violated the existing US Hawks Terms of Service. For that reason, the entire topic containing the violating posts has been temporarily removed from public view. If we decide to follow those terms of service, then I suspect that we'll be removing a lot of additional information from this forum (I believe, for example, that many of Tad's posts are in clear violation). We can also decide to change our own Terms of Service to make them fit what we want the US Hawks to be. That's an important discussion for the Board when it is formed. Until then, if anyone sees a post that they feel is in violation of the Terms of Service, please flag it with the "Report" button. Thanks.

[Bill Cummings]

Free,
Since you called this topic to the attentions of the Hawks maybe the person, in this instance you, that brought up the issue should act as the board president until this topic has been resolved. What are the feelings of the club on a rotating board presidency going to the originator of a discussion taken up by the practicing board members?
Before I accidentally “step in it,” I would like anyone that might know already to clear up some questions that I have.

I see that the phpBB Group has indemnified themselves with a disclaimer that, “---, the phpBB Group are not responsible for what we allow and/or disallow as permissible content and/or conduct.”
So who is the IP provider here?
Is it Bob K. or phpBB Group?
Why can they, phpBB, indemnify themselves and does or dose not Bob K. also have that ability?

Can we, US Hawks, legally change the phpBB terms or is our only other option, “---please do not use and/or access----” US Hawks Hang Gliding Association?

If we the US Hawks find ourselves bound by the terms set forth by the phpBB Group this could turn out to be a short discussion.

Should it present itself as a grey area when voting whether or not to ban a member violating the terms of service I can foresee an appearance of impropriety arising. I personally have been under verbal attack here. If I’m on a volunteer board that is tinkering with the rules trust in the procedure may come into question when the votes are tallied to ban someone in violation.

In the interest of protecting trust in the procedure should this situation come to fruition I will abstain from any vote to have the antagonist in my recent situation removed.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Before we get started, I just wanted to let everyone know that this is a Trial Board of Directors discussion. The purpose is to see - using a real example - how the people on this forum might work together to solve a problem.

As it stands now, I currently assume both the authority and responsibility for this forum. Whatever I do (or don't do) is on my shoulders. So please don't worry about assuming any responsibility for the outcome of this discussion because I will end up making any actual decisions and taking responsibility for them. In other words ...

buckstopsherefrontsmall.jpg (6.36 KiB) Viewed 11240 times

Having said that, I would like the participants in this Trial Board to make their decisions as if the consequences might actually fall on their shoulders. While the decision you reach will be advisory (to me), I'd like each of you to imagine that the decision you make will stand.

Finally, I'd like to set one ground rule for membership on this Board. I'd like to have a real phone number for each person who decides to participate so I can call them up and talk to them as real people. The phone number certainly doesn't have to be made public, but I do encourage all Trial Board members to share their phone numbers privately with each other. I can't count the number of misunderstandings I've seen between people on forums that were easily resolved just by talking to each other. Anyone who feels this is too much of an invasion of their privacy is probably not serious enough about the Board to participate.

[Free]

Free,
Since you called this topic to the attentions of the Hawks maybe the person, in this instance you, that brought up the issue should act as the board president until this topic has been resolved. What are the feelings of the club on a rotating board presidency going to the originator of a discussion taken up by the practicing board members?

Thanks Bill, for the vote of confidence but I'm thinking, anyone that wants to be boss of anything probably shouldn't be considered for the job.
I get a bad taste in my mouth in consolidation of power by corporate fictions. That said, a "Board" making a decision would be a diffusion of power from a single "decider" making all calls.
Bob, picked you for Board President and I think maybe he is looking in the fine print for reasons to ban my postings, anyway!
It wouldn't be the first time, and if that is the case, I'll take the job!

Should it present itself as a grey area when voting whether or not to ban a member violating the terms of service I can foresee an appearance of impropriety arising. I personally have been under verbal attack here. If I’m on a volunteer board that is tinkering with the rules trust in the procedure may come into question when the votes are tallied to ban someone in violation.

That's a noble thought Bill, and seems fair if someone is getting the boot. Conflict of interest and all, but you should still be able to argue the case either way.
Anonymous verbal attack is the easiest and perhaps the only time for quick-draw bannings.
This is what is so sad about Sara's example. It was a no brainer that did not compute.
We all failed her.

In the interest of protecting trust in the procedure should this situation come to fruition I will abstain from any vote to have the antagonist in my recent situation removed.

Scratching my head about recent antagonist..
Someone said something that might/could get them removed?
This could be a test case if you feel there are grounds for action.

PS: I just saw Bob's latest post. "The Buck Stops Here".
I don't know, maybe he is saying that he's not giving up control anyway.
This whole discussion may be for nothing.

PS: PS: Bob added text to previous post that confirms my previous speculation.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Thanks Bill, for the vote of confidence but I'm thinking, anyone that wants to be boss of anything probably shouldn't be considered for the job.
I get a bad taste in my mouth in consolidation of power by corporate fictions. That said, a "Board" making a decision would be a diffusion of power from a single "decider" making all calls.

It's a remarkable coincidence that you were thinking that, Warren. Earlier tonight I was thinking about the difference between the US Hawks and the other forums that you've mentioned (hanggliding.org and ozreport.com). The thought was crossing my mind that both Jack and Davis have struggled to maintain a tight grip on their forums - banning anyone who challenged them. By contrast, I am here rying to figure out some way to distribute control of the organization to the members ... to you all. In fact, I'd have already done that years ago if it weren't for the lessons learned from the HGAA fiasco. In fact, my track record in distributing power is pretty good there (maybe too good!!). I was the founding member of the HGAA (member #1), and I almost immediately turned control over to what we called the "Transition Team" where I was just one member. That group wasn't ready for "prime time" and the whole effort folded very quickly. That's why I'm going much much slower this time. That's why I want us to get some practice working together before the future of the US Hawks is resting on that ability.

Bob, picked you for Board President and I think maybe he is looking in the fine print for reasons to ban my postings, anyway!
It wouldn't be the first time, and if that is the case, I'll take the job!

It's not the case that I'm looking for reasons to ban you Warren, so there's no need to take the job on that count. I would, however, like to figure out how to reduce your paranoia so you don't think that everyone who's ever worked for a defense contractor is a CIA operative out to get you. I have a lot of work ahead of me on that one!!

Anonymous verbal attack is the easiest and perhaps the only time for quick-draw bannings.
This is what is so sad about Sara's example. It was a no brainer that did not compute.
We all failed her.

We're trying to do something on this forum that I personally haven't seen done before ... anywhere. The US wasn't "born" with our current Constitution. We started with the "Articles of Confederation", and they were found to be lacking. So the founding fathers went back to the drawing board and tried again. That's what we're doing here on the US Hawks. We're trying to build a national hang gliding organization that's never been built like this before. We've seen what happened to USHPA. We've seen what happened to the HGAA. We've seen the problems we've had so far on this forum (and other forums). Can we find a way to do better? That's the question before us.

PS: I just saw Bob's latest post. "The Buck Stops Here".
I don't know, maybe he is saying that he's not giving up control anyway.
This whole discussion may be for nothing.

I think you may have seen an interim version of that post. I sometimes start a post with a picture and then work on the text until it's finished. It's finished now, and I hope it answers your questions.