Untitled Document

The position of JAG is to be held by two players, one JAG and one Deputy JAG (dJAG). The positions can be held by any player wishing to hold one, after approval from the Council. Both JAG and dJAG can not serve on the same RP unit.
One player holds the primary position of JAG and should handle all relevant investigations. The second player, in the position of Deputy JAG, should only intervene when there is a presumption of bias. Bias shall be presumed when the charges involve someone:

a) within the JAG's immediate RP unit (or the JAG)
b) with whom the JAG is known to be good friends
c) with whom the JAG has been known to have had personal conflict
d) whom the Federation Council has reason to believe the JAG might be biased against

Complaint Process: Decision to be made: Is the JAG able to fulfill the duties outlined in this resolution? If not the complaint should be sent to the Deputy JAG. Informal or Formal complaints available.

Informal:
A simple investigation. The JAG is approached with a complaint. The JAG informally looks into the complaint by interviewing the accuser and accused. A solution is offered. If accepted, it is the end of the investigation. If not accepted, the investigation moves to a formal complaint.
Formal:
Procedures outlined in this resolution are followed as dictated. Beginning with a preliminary investigation committee.

Once a complaint has been filed, extra care should be taken to protect the accused, the accuser and any witnesses. As such, the following should quell any fears of infringing on the rights of any party involved in a JAG level investigation.

Protection of the Accuser or Witness:
Confidentiality protected insofar as possible. Retaliation against the accuser or a witness is prohibited. Any retaliation by any party will result in removal from RP for the duration of the investigation. It will also result in an investigation into the acts of retaliation.

Protection of the Accused:
Immediately informed of a complaint and assured of due process. (Process that follows the guidelines dictated in this resolution or hereafter amended to this resolution.) Has the opportunity to make a statement to the investigating committee, giving their view of the events. (Nothing more.) After the statement has been made, the accused agrees to allow the committee to proceed without further interruption. False or malicious complaints are subject to immediate actions and discipline from the JAG. Upon severe judgments (removal from the game or command are two examples) the accused has one automatic appeal. The appeal is to the Federation Council who will review the charges, investigation and judgment.

Class 1: Command violation. Any violations involving the CO or ExO of a FRPG RP Unit
Class 2: Conduct deemed unbecoming a Starfleet officer.
Class 3: Repeated acts unbecoming a *Player* - Repeated violation of one rule, or violation of multiple rules set forth by the FED RPG.
Class 4: Interpersonal conflicts.
Class 5: Acts unbecoming a *Player* - Violation of a single rule, or violation of multiple rules set forth by the Federation RPG.

Class 1 - Any violation made by a Commanding Officer or Executive Officer. These violations would concern any violation of command ethics or command procedure. Such as: heavy handed authority, uneven authority, lack of posting, lack of leadership and so on.
Class 2 - I see this as racism, sexism, discrimination (on anything), rude conduct, unfair authority. Any act that conflicts with what the Council deems suitable for continuity of the Game.
Class 3 - This can get serious if the rules are continually broken. It could be termed, blatant disregard of the rules. It is directed at the player. Exception: Grandstanding falls into this category. Should the CO intervene and not be able to correct the problem on the first offense, a second offense shall result in actions assigned to this category.
Class 4 - These would be defined as conflicts within the crew. Something as simple as two players just not getting along, for example.
Class 5 - Straight forward. An example is misuse of the addresses obtained through the game.

Actions to be taken for each class violation. This is where the real fun begins. There is likely to be much debate about these, so when we discuss them, let's do it one at a time. Starting with the least offensive. Reporting an offense to a JAG (when the CO is handling the situation) does not warrant investigation. It is a simple measure to keep a JAG informed of the history of the player, should future violations occur. Should the situation involve a player from the JAG's ship the report should be sent to both the JAG and Deputy JAG. Should the situation involve the JAG, the report should be sent to *only* the Deputy JAG. At all times, the steps should be followed as outlined below.

Class 5: This would easily be corrected by the CO. First offense should never involve the JAG. The CO should still make an attempt to correct the situation, after a second offense. Considering this might be a constant problem, it should be *reported* to the JAG. A third offense would reclassify this violation as class 3.

Class 4: The first step is intervention by the ship's CO. The JAG should *not* be involved at this time. If that does not work, the second step would be mediation between all parties concerned with the JAG being appointing a mediator. Should this not correct the problem the next step would be transfer of one player off the role-play unit. (Unless mediation has already ordered a transfer. In that case, the third step is removal from ARP.) Should the problem still not be corrected the final step would be removal from active role-play (ARP) of the antagonist. Should both parties be deemed to be at fault, both would be removed from ARP. (Should one party be willing to attempt to correct the problem, [I guess you can read that as not at as much fault], this party should at least receive *reconsideration* for staying in the game.)

If, at any time, one player decides to resign from the game, this should be immediately brought before JAG and Starfleet Operations, in hopes that a position may be obtained elsewhere in the fleet. We should make a concerted effort to transfer any player to another unit, rather than let them resign because of personal conflicts.

Class 3: In conjunction with a class 5 violation this violation is immediately presented to the JAG for investigation. It should be noted, this is the *third* violation by the player. The player would have been repeatedly warned by the CO that his actions were inappropriate. That would constitute unofficial warnings by the CO. Exception: Grandstanding: Upon a second offense of grandstanding an immediate investigation will be commissioned. The player in question will be informed. Corrective measures will vary depending on severity, number of offenses and the investigation committee's report. Should no corrective measure be brought forth, the player will be deemed to have, committed "Acts that are not conducive to a ordered and pleasurable gaming environment." The player will then be removed from ARP.

Class 2: Again, the first step is intervention by the CO. However, this violation can be seriously detrimental to the crew. As such it should be *reported* to the JAG. Furthermore, any additional violations should be immediately presented to the JAG for investigation.

Class 1: Depending on the actual violation, various actions could be taken. Note, this class is *any* violation that involves the CO or ExO of a RP Unit. A command violation is a serious matter. It can span anything from not posting enough to inconsistent authority. It is usually only noticed when a player brings it to the attention of the JAG.

Should the JAG hear about the situation, first hand (first time) from a player on the CO's ship. The JAG will inform that player to take it up with the CO or ExO (whichever is relevant). The JAG will also send a message indicating the occurrence of a complaint. Names will not be given to prevent recursive action. This will constitute an informal warning.

Step one would be bringing the concern to the attention of the CO or ExO. This should rectify the problem. This is a direct message from the JAG to the relevant party stating "There is a problem. Please fix it." and that will be the end of it. Should that not correct the problem, the second time a similar problem is brought before the JAG there will be a informal investigation. The CO or ExO will be informed of the investigation. In doing so, the CO or ExO must agree to remain calm and unintrusive (Meaning they better behave). The CO or ExO should only participate if "questioned" by the committee. Should the CO or ExO turn and react on the accuser, during any investigation, the CO will be removed from his/her position immediately. There will be no toleration for such conduct from a command level officer. Should this investigation prove that the charges warrant further action a formal investigation will be launched.

This investigation is to determine if the accusations are just a grudge being held by the player, or if the charges are even legitimate. By now, the CO or ExO has a fair idea of who the accuser is. This investigation should not involve the CO or ExO to prevent the CO or ExO acting against the accuser.

The formal investigation will begin with the CO's or ExO's reply to the charges brought forth by the preliminary investigation. From that reply, the investigation will continue in a manner suitable to the charges.

Resolution #9933C:

Mediation Defined: Either the JAG or person appointed by the JAG will hear both sides of the conflict separately. Solutions will be drawn from both sides and presented. Compromises will be made until a solution can be made that is acceptable by both parties and will not be detrimental to the game.
Informal (Preliminary) Investigation Defined: A committee of four will be assigned to finding hard facts. One member of the committee will always be the JAG and will do no investigating, but will see to orderly discussion and timely reporting. No conclusions are drawn by the committee. When reports are furnished the JAG will weigh both sides and formulate official charges. The charges are sent to the player in question. These committee members will be chosen from the higher ranking players in the game with length of play considered. These members do not have to be from different units and could be members of the Council.
Formal Investigation Defined: After an informal investigation has reported and charges have been formulated, a committee of four will be appointed. This committee will include the JAG, again in the position of "secretary", 2 prosecutors and one defender. There are two prosecutors to prevent overloading one player with a daunting task. The defender should be from the accused's unit. These committee members will be chosen from separate role-play units, whenever possible.