Jump to content

Talk:Universal Code of Conduct/Enforcement draft guidelines review/fa

Add topic
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

  Please remember to:


  Discussion navigation:


Universal Code of Conduct/Enforcement draft guidelines review

[edit]


'Overview'

[edit]

'Preventive work (articles 1 and 2 UCOC)'

[edit]

'Responsive work (article 3 UCOC)'

[edit]

'Principles for processing and filing of reported cases'

[edit]

'Providing resources for processing cases'

[edit]

'Types of violations and enforcement mechanism / groups'

[edit]

'Recommendations for the reporting and processing tool'

[edit]

'Recommendations for local enforcement structures'

[edit]

'Recommendations for how to process appeals'

[edit]

Open questions for the Community

[edit]

Escalation: Where do the complaints go, what instance/body/judge is supposed to process them.

[edit]

Regulations for appeal (after the previous question "Where do the complaints go" has been answered).

[edit]

Should the U4C committee also decide individual cases or process appeals?

[edit]

When should someone be able to initiate an appeal for a UCoC violation?

[edit]

What kinds of behavior or evidence would we want to see before granting an appeal?

[edit]

Who should handle the appeals process?

[edit]

How often should someone be allowed to appeal a UCoC violation decision?

[edit]

To what extent should individual Wikimedia projects be allowed to decide how they enforce the UCoC?

[edit]

How will people be chosen for the U4C committee?

[edit]
Our current recommended list of users include, but are not limited to: CheckUsers, oversighters, bureaucrats, administrators of local projects, arbitration committee members, Wikimedia Foundation employees, Affiliates, etc.

Should an interim committee be formed while the "U4C" committee is being created?

[edit]

Should global conduct committees, such as the Technical Code of Conduct committee, be merged into the proposed U4C?

[edit]

General comments

[edit]