The Doctrine Jury Protocol is the formal peer-review process used when a crew, department, or network body is challenged for breaking alignment with the Code of Practice or Steward Logic.
It is used only when necessary to:
- Resolve disputes over practice integrity.
- Review claims of harm or method abandonment.
- Determine whether network support should continue or pause.
It is not a punishment system.
It is a peer accountability safeguard.
When to Use the Doctrine Jury Protocol
- When a verified crew is challenged for breaking care, memory, or rotation.
- When infrastructure bodies fail to meet transparency or structural commitments.
- When non-support decisions are contested by affected crews.
How It Works
Step | Description |
1. Documentation Submitted | The challenging party provides written documentation of the alleged breach. |
2. Jury Convened | A temporary jury of verified stewards from outside the conflict is formed. |
3. Review and Deliberation | The jury reviews all evidence, including the challenged crew’s response. |
4. Public Summary Issued | A written summary of findings and outcomes is published. |
5. Decision Implemented | Support may continue, pause, or be restored based on jury findings. |
What It Is Not
- It is not a public trial for reputation.
- It is not a social media spectacle.
- It is not a top-down authority imposing decisions.
It is a peer-reviewed safeguard
designed to protect the structure
not punish people.
Doctrine Jury Self-Check
[ ] Has the challenge been documented and submitted?[ ] Has a neutral jury been convened?[ ] Has both sides provided evidence?[ ] Has a public summary been published?
If you check all four
the process has integrity.