PASS NEPA Proposal: RSO Policies

Status
Not open for further replies.

Vryan

Rogue
Alliance General Manager
New Hampshire Staff
Proposed by NEPA 7/18/23
Seconded by Crossroads, Chicago, Gettysburg, Wisconsin (sending to vote), New Hampshire 7/19/23

Summary: Alliance LARP prohibits all Registered Sex Offenders (RSO) from attending Alliance LARP events. Additionally, the Sexual Offender lists found at https://www.nsopw.gov/ will be used to vet any member of chapter or national staff. Chapters are not expected to collect identification from players to verify their RSO status, but should be addressing this on an as needed basis.

Effective immediately all current staff will be vetted using the above link. New staff going forward will be vetted against this same list before being permitted to take on a staff position. Every staff member across the Alliance will be revetted annually. No one appearing on the registry, including players, will be allowed to attend any Alliance LARP event.

In order to ensure safety across Alliance LARP, chapter owners are required to share the names of any RSOs that attempt to attend their events.

The Presidents (or their appointed designee) may at any point request information to conduct an audit of existing staff to verify these checks are being performed. If the Presidents appoint an individual to perform this audit they must inform the Chapter Owner being audited of the designees identity.

Vote: Policy Proposal from NEPA [PASS]
The following chapters voted for this policy: Crossroads, NEPA, Atlanta, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Gettysburg, Wisconsin, Denver, Virginia, Chicago
The following chapters voted against this policy: None
The following chapters voted to abstain: None
The following chapter was ineligible to vote due to being prior to completing their first event: CAAZ

Synopsis of Conversations: There was a lot of conversation around this proposal, which was put together to address player concerns raised regarding a prior staff member of the Denver chapter. A consensus was quickly reached that these concerns merited immediate action by the organization. Some worries regarding this policy’s wording and implementation were raised and resulted in specific language changes which are reflected above. Other worries that came up in conversation which are not addressed here but may be addressed in the future include: more comprehensive protections for players outside the scope of RSOs; discrepancies that exist state-to-state in how an offender is registered; safeguards against injustices within the criminal justice system.
 
I highly encourage further review of this policy. Not being on the registry doesn't mean you aren't a threat. This leads to a false sense of security. I highly recommend that Alliance make an offense-based policy. For example, does the Alliance want to ban someone for a misdemeanor urinating in public charge from Florida (registerable offense) but allow a 24 year old that rapes a 14 year old in California (not registrable).
 
Hi there,

We’ve already committed to reviewing this policy. The policy, as passed, was an immediate action that national staff and owners felt needed to be done. But, no one has determined that our work is finished.

To quote from the above directly:

“Other worries that came up in conversation which are not addressed here but may be addressed in the future include: more comprehensive protections for players outside the scope of RSOs; discrepancies that exist state-to-state in how an offender is registered; safeguards against injustices within the criminal justice system.”

This is a complex issue and we are not flippantly acting out here. The serious work has begun, and will continue.

Thank you,

Stephen
National CS
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top