Scope and Evidence Policy
This policy sets out what concerns we will and won't act on, and what standard of evidence we use when making decisions. Our aim is to keep everyone safe while being fair and consistent.
Last updated: 27/01/2026
Where We Can Act
- At Glasgow Furs meets and events: We can act directly - warnings, removals, suspensions, bans.
- In official Glasgow Furs spaces (e.g. Telegram chats we run): We can act directly in those spaces and may also restrict attendance where safety requires it.
- Outside Glasgow Furs: We generally don't take action on reports about behaviour outside our spaces, but we may consider action if there's credible evidence of a serious safety risk to our attendees, volunteers, or venues.
What We Act On
- Threats of violence or intimidation
- Sexual assault, unwanted sexual contact, or sexual harassment
- Physical assault or credible threats of harm
- Stalking, persistent unwanted contact, or doxxing attempts
- Carrying weapons or making credible weapon threats
- Discriminatory harassment
- Serious venue safety risks (suspected spiking, dangerous intoxication, overcrowding)
- Repeated boundary-pushing after being asked to stop
- Aggressive behaviour, persistent hostility, or intimidation
- Repeated disruption after warnings
- Being under the influence in a way that creates a safety risk
These may be logged as a concern but aren't normally grounds for restrictions on their own:
- Personal disputes or relationship issues between individuals
- Vague or general claims without specifics
- Unverified online allegations, screenshots without context, or second/third-hand reports
- Offsite conduct where we have no credible evidence and no clear safety risk
If something feels off but we don't have evidence, we focus on welfare and monitoring rather than punishment.
Evidence Standards
| Level | Examples |
|---|---|
| Strong (usually sufficient) | Detailed first-hand reports (especially consistent across multiple people), volunteer/venue observations, clear relevant messages or photos |
| Weak (rarely sufficient alone) | Anonymous or vague allegations, unsubstantiated claims, unclear screenshots, second/third-hand reports |
| Pattern evidence | Multiple independent concerns about similar behaviour can justify closer monitoring - but we avoid escalating to bans on pattern alone unless the behaviour is high-risk and well supported |
How We Decide
- Least intrusive action that keeps people safe (warning before removal where appropriate).
- If you're close to the people involved, step back.
- We aim for consistency across cases.
- If we act, we document why.
What Actions Are Available
- No action (out of scope or insufficient evidence)
- Welfare support or signposting
- Informal warning
- Formal warning
- Removal from a meet or event
- Temporary suspension
- Temporary ban from paid events
- Permanent ban (rare; requires strong evidence)