Harassment consultation 2015/Ideas/An outside observer on the arbitration committee
What is the problem you're trying to solve?
Per this discussion: "A huge issue on Wikipedia is that our dispute-resolution processes sometimes (perhaps often) end up constituting harassment, and may even put editors in danger. For example, when you're being stalked online, experts will tell you that it's important to disengage. Don't respond (except perhaps for one message saying you want to be left alone); don't acknowledge. But if that person takes you through dispute-resolution on Wikipedia, the arbitration committee will penalize you for not responding. You're expected to submit evidence, respond to evidence, everything is posted in public, and it might continue for months."
What is your solution?
Again from the previous discussion, "We need an expert who can point out how flawed this is, and who can bring our thinking about harassment and dispute resolution up to date. There are multiple examples of editors being placed in awkward positions because of things done by people in positions of influence on Wikipedia, and it happens because those people are not familiar with how other organizations handle harassment.
"I'd like to see an expert who reports to the executive director. I'm thinking of someone with a proven track record; the two most obvious backgrounds are law and sociology, but I can think of non-academic backgrounds too."
- Discuss this idea at: Talk:Harassment consultation 2015/Ideas/An outside observer on the arbitration committee
- Return to the Consultation main page