4 Conflict, Repair & Accountability

The community MUST define an explicit conflict classification system that is known, accessible, and usable by all members.

At minimum, the classification system MUST include the following classes:

• Interpersonal conflicts (between individuals)
• Role-based conflicts (authority, responsibility, or mandate disputes)
• Structural conflicts (systemic incentives, rules, or resource allocation issues)
• Ethical or boundary violations (violations of declared norms, scope , or safety boundaries)

Each conflict class MUST explicitly define:

• Entry criteria (how a situation is classified into this class)
• Expected response priority and timelines (if any)
• Permitted and required resolution pathways
• Documentation requirements and privacy boundaries

Conflicts involving credible safety risks, coercion, abuse, or threats MUST be classified as safety-critical and MUST trigger elevated safeguards as defined in Section 6.3.

Misclassification or avoidance of classification MUST be treated as a process failure subject to review.

The community MUST define a minimum conflict resolution process applicable to all conflict classes.

The resolution process MUST include a clearly defined resolution ladder with explicit escalation steps.

The resolution ladder MUST define, at minimum:

• How a conflict is raised, logged, and acknowledged
• How involved parties are notified and invited to participate
• How refusal, non-response, or withdrawal is handled
• How mediators or facilitators are selected, replaced, or declined
• Time-bounded expectations for each stage (where applicable)
• Documentation requirements and access rules
• A process for reviewing procedural failures or deadlock

The resolution process MUST be accessible without requiring social status, seniority, charisma, or informal proximity to decision-makers.

Unresolved conflicts MUST escalate through defined governance pathways without bypassing the Decision Matrix defined in Layer 2.

The community MUST define explicit safeguards for conflicts involving power asymmetries, dependency relationships, or safety risks.

Safeguards MUST include protections against retaliation for:

• Raising a concern
• Requesting mediation
• Providing testimony or evidence
• Participating in a review or appeal

Where a power differential exists between parties, elevated safeguards MUST be applied, which MAY include:

• Independent or external facilitation
• Separate intake, documentation, or communication channels
• Temporary suspension or limitation of role authority
• Additional evidence and review thresholds prior to sanctions

For safety-critical conflicts, the community MUST define immediate protective actions that may be taken prior to full process completion, which MAY include:

• Temporary separation measures
• Restricted access to shared spaces or resources
• Temporary role suspension
• Emergency escalation timelines

Safety safeguards MUST override participation rights, role continuity, and operational convenience.

The community MUST define an explicit sanctions and repair framework.

Sanctions and repair actions MUST be:

• Proportional to the violation
• Explicitly documented
• Time-bounded where applicable
• Reviewable and appealable

The framework MUST define, at minimum:

• Available sanction and repair types
• Preconditions and evidence standards
• Authorized roles or bodies for application
• Review and appeal mechanisms
• Conditions for restoring rights, roles, or participation

Separation, suspension, or removal actions MUST follow due process and MUST align with exit and separation rules defined in Layer 1.

Sanctions MUST NOT be applied through informal exclusion, social pressure, silence, or implicit withdrawal of rights.

Repair-oriented actions MUST be prioritized over punitive actions except in safety-critical cases.

The following artifacts are mandatory for Layer 4 compliance:

• Conflict Resolution Ladder
• Accountability Protocol

Layer 4 artifacts MUST be:

• Explicit and unambiguous
• Versioned
• Accessible to all members, with clearly bounded privacy protections
• Adopted through an authorized governance process

The Conflict Resolution Ladder MUST define, at minimum:

• Conflict classification inputs and escalation thresholds
• Resolution stages and facilitator selection rules
• Documentation and information access boundaries
• Safety-critical exceptions and immediate safeguards

The Accountability Protocol MUST define, at minimum:

• Investigation, review, and decision mechanisms
• Due process guarantees and anti-retaliation protections
• Sanction and repair options with proportionality rules
• Appeals, oversight, and escalation paths
• Coordination with Layer 1 exit and separation processes

Conflict MUST be treated as a handled condition with defined pathways; ignoring, suppressing, or normalizing unresolved conflict MUST be considered a system violation.

Conflicts involving power asymmetries MUST trigger elevated safeguards.

Repair and restoration MUST precede punishment except where immediate safety is at risk.

Physical, psychological, and child safety MUST override participation rights, role continuity, and reputational concerns.

The following MUST be explicit:

• Conflict classification system
• Minimum resolution and escalation process
• Safeguards and anti-retaliation protections
• Sanction , repair, and separation thresholds

The following MAY be explicit:

• Mediation styles or methodologies
• Facilitator selection preferences beyond minimum safeguards
• Restorative or reparative practices

The following MUST remain optional and out of scope :

• Emotional expression norms
• Therapeutic, spiritual, or ideological framing of conflict