Grants:IdeaLab/More culture, less harassment
What is the problem you're trying to solve?
Harassment is an hideous way to exerce power. Bureaucracy creates a little power. Even a small power can create occasions for harassment. To reduce this danger, it's desirable to have less bureaucracy and more culture. Culture is the best antidote to harassment.
What is your solution?
In a big cultural project as Wikipedia, culture should be the pole star. It is not possible to abolish bureacracy, but it should be desirable to have less bureaucracy and to select the people who exerce the power on a cultural basis. An open mind couldn't intimidate or censure other people's ideas. At the same time, a single person has less power than a cluster and is defenseless in front of a group of people who act against him/her. In a democratic context, the selection of bureaucrats, administrators, officers, people who exerce power, is a very serious passage, and should be done on very serious, cultural basis. On the other hand, the single person has to be guaranteed in front of the power of a group. One can ignore the harassment of someone who has the same power, but one can't ignore the harassment exerced by someone or by a group of people who have more power, as little as that can be.
The goal of this project is a "cultural agreement". People who have been harassed often loose the capacity to express their feelings. Some of them try to fight, others go away. These are primary solutions to survive in an hostile environment, but in one way or the other it is a big loss for the community. The goal of this project is to prevent this kind of consequences by proposing to adopt a "cultural agreement" for the people who exerce the power and for the members of the community. This agreement would be a warrant for everybody of a fair, open and kind attitude in the mutual relationships. An agreement must be kept, as Romans said https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacta_sunt_servanda. If someone doesn't keep the agreement, this person has to apologize, otherwise there will be a sanction. The agreement should be elaborated following the guidelines of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Etiquette, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Civility and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith, or other suggestions provided by the community members. It should be voted by the community for its approval. This project aims to elaborate a simple questionary to propose online to the community members to settle the points of the "cultural agreement".
- ok this would be a good supplement to "code of conduct", voluntary agreement and buy-in into behavior norms. would require training and enforcement. this could start as a "for your information", and move to "we invite your agreement to work with us." Slowking4 (talk) 02:46, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Besides your proposal being very vague on the content of the agreement, don't we already have https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Etiquette and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Civility? Making moderators sign a form that seems to boil down to "I won't be an asshole" is also quite belittling in my opinion and probably in violation of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Doveofsymplegades (talk)
- Thank you for your opposition. It's just an idea that I'm working on. It's useful to know what people think about it.
- @Gamaliel: Thank you for your opposition. Declaration of sentiments can be very important, according to history. It's an open proposal, anyone can give contributions.
- Oppose, no specifics to this. The only specific (a forced "apology" or sanctions) is something I'd always oppose; forced apologies mean nothing. Seraphimblade (talk) 18:02, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
- @Seraphimblade: Grazie per questa opposizione, particolarmente significativa. Senza scuse, e quindi senza la consapevolezza di una cattiva azione, non c'è rispetto reciproco, base della civiltà. Senza sanzione non c'è legge, e senza legge non c'è responsabilità, ce lo insegna il Diritto. Una qualsiasi forma di legge, anche embrionale, è l'unica vera garanzia contro la prepotenza e l'arbitrio, ce lo insegna la Storia. Una comunità senza legge è un'utopia. Si è fuori dalla civiltà e dalla cultura e si rientra nello stato di natura, in cui vige la legge del più forte.
Expand your idea
Would a grant from the Wikimedia Foundation help make your idea happen? You can expand this idea into a grant proposal.