Trust and Safety/Case Review Committee/Monthly reports

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This page contains monthly reports to the Wikimedia community on the activities of the Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee (CRC, or ICRC). As specified in the Case Review Committee Handbook, reports to the community take place on a monthly basis. Reports are written by the Interim Case Review Committee Facilitator, currently BChoo (WMF) (talk · contribs).

March 2021[edit]

Report posted 20:15, 2 April 2021 (UTC).

This is the sixth monthly report for the Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee (CRC, or ICRC). It covers the CRC's activities from 1 March 2021 to 31 March 2021. For an overview of the CRC and its responsibilities, please refer to the CRC’s page on meta.

During this period, the CRC reviewed one appeal and found that the original sanctions imposed by Wikimedia Foundation Trust & Safety (T&S) in the case were not severe enough given the severity of the conduct described (as per point 3 in the CRC Handbook review criteria). Based on its findings, the committee returned the case to T&S for further review. This review produced an updated recommendation, and T&S implemented more severe sanctions in the case.

March 2021 Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee Appeal Totals
Month Cases ratified Cases overturned Cases remanded to T&S Ineligible appeals Total appeals
October 2020 0 0 0 0 0

November 2020

0 0 0 2 3
December 2020 1 0 0

1

1
January 2021 0 0 0 0 0
February 2021 0 0 0 0 1
March 2021 0 0 1 0 0
Total 1 0 1 3 5

February 2021[edit]

Report posted 22:07, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

This is the fifth monthly report for the Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee (CRC, or ICRC). It covers the CRC's activities from 24 January 2021 to 28 February 2021. For an overview of the CRC and its responsibilities, please refer to the CRC’s page on meta.

  • During this period, the CRC received one appeal, which was deemed eligible for review. The review is ongoing.
  • The CRC prepared its first quarterly report to the Board of Trustees for submission on 1 March 2021, building off the content presented here in the monthly reports.
  • The CRC Handbook and Charter have been updated to reflect changes made during the first quarterly meeting (Handbook change, Charter change).
  • Through its case reviews, the CRC has been engaging with Foundation Trust & Safety to provide feedback on its processes.
February 2021 Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee Appeal Totals
Month Cases ratified Cases overturned Cases remanded to T&S Ineligible new appeals Total new appeals
October 2020 0 0 0 0 0
November 2020 0 0 0 2 3
December 2020 1 0 0 1 1
January 2021 0 0 0 0 0
February 2021 0 0 0 0 1
Total 1 0 0 3 5

January 2021[edit]

Report posted 21:31, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

This is the fourth monthly report for the Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee (CRC, or ICRC). It covers the CRC's activities from 24 December 2020 to 23 January 2021. For an overview of the CRC and its responsibilities, please refer to the CRC’s page on meta.

During this period, the CRC did not receive any new appeals.

The CRC held its first quarterly meeting in January 2021. The CRC’s Foundation support staff proposed revisions to its Handbook based on learnings from the committee’s initial months. At this meeting, the CRC reviewed, edited, and then approved these changes. These changes will be added to the Meta-Wiki copy of the document in February 2021.

Though the CRC’s first quarter involved a low volume of appeals, the ones that did come in prompted both the committee and its supporting staff to think hard about difficult trust & safety questions. Moving forward, the CRC will work on improving how relevant parties are informed of the appeals process.

Here are the CRC's appeals numbers to date:

Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee Appeal Totals
Month Cases ratified Cases overturned Cases remanded to T&S Ineligible new appeals Total new appeals
October 2020 0 0 0 0 0
November 2020 0 0 0 2 3
December 2020 1 0 0 1 1
January 2021 0 0 0 0 0
Total 1 0 0 3 4

December 2020[edit]

Report posted 23:08, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

This is the third monthly report for the Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee (CRC, or ICRC). It covers the CRC's activities from 23 November, 2020 to 23 December, 2020. For an overview of the CRC and its responsibilities, please refer to the CRC’s page on meta.

During this monthly period:

  1. The CRC completed its first case review. The CRC determined that the original Trust & Safety (T&S) office action being appealed in this case was appropriate.
  2. The CRC received one new appeal, which was deemed ineligible for review by the Foundation's legal counsel.

Please see the CRC Charter for details on case eligibility and the CRC Handbook for more on the CRC appeals and review process.

Here are the CRC's appeals numbers to date:

Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee Appeal Totals
Month Cases ratified Cases overturned Cases remanded to T&S Ineligible new appeals Total new appeals
October 2020 0 0 0 0 0
November 2020 0 0 0 2 3
December 2020 1 0 0 1 1
Total 1 0 0 3 4

November 2020[edit]

Report posted 19:43, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

This is the second monthly report for the Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee (CRC, or ICRC). It covers the CRC's activities from 21 October 2020 to 24 November 2020. For an overview of the CRC and its responsibilities, please refer to the CRC’s page on meta.

The CRC received its first request for appeal during this period and three appeals in total. One of these appeals was deemed eligible for review by the Foundation's legal counsel. The review is ongoing.

October 2020[edit]

Report posted 21:51, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

This is the first monthly report for the Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee (CRC, or ICRC). For an overview of the CRC and its responsibilities, please refer to the CRC’s page on meta.

Activities[edit]

The CRC convened for the first time virtually in mid-September. In this meeting, they discussed the appeals process in detail and asked questions of the Foundation staff who are supporting their work. Notably, the CRC created the Vice Chair position. The Vice Chair will be able to help with Chair duties in cases where the Chair is unavailable, but will not have access to the appeals inbox or receive other information designated only for the Chair, such as why an appeal was not eligible. No modification to the Handbook was necessary for this change. The CRC elected leadership (Chair and Vice Chair) after the meeting. Once leadership was selected, the CRC began to accept appeals.

On 28 September, a notice that appeals were open was posted on the English Wikipedia village pump, the wikimedia-l mailing list, the Wikipedia Weekly Facebook group, and the CRC talk page on meta.

As of this report, there have been no appeals.

Updated FAQ[edit]

This section updates the FAQ on the CRC Charter, including three new questions.

New questions[edit]
Q. How long does the process take?
A. The amount of time it takes Foundation counsel to review an appeal’s eligibility depends on the volume of appeals. As long as there is no significant backlog, it should not take more than a few days for an appeal to be reviewed by counsel.
Q. Do I need to submit appeals in English?
A. Appeals may be submitted in any language. Appeals submitted in a language where T&S does not have internal capacity may take a bit longer to process.
Q. Can conduct warnings be appealed?
A. Yes. Trust & Safety’s sanctions toolkit ranges from “no sanctions” to “conduct warning” to “event ban” (temporary or permanent) to “global ban.” The committee might decide that a user who was warned should have been banned or that a user who was banned should have been warned. It might decide that a user who received no sanctions should have been sanctioned by the Foundation. Please see the table in the CRC handbook for more details.
Updated questions[edit]
Q. Why are the committee members anonymous?
A. Community governance carries with it several risks, including a risk of retaliation by people disappointed with case review outcomes (even from those who are simply informed that their case is not eligible for review, for instance, because it is criminal in nature) and a risk of pressure to expose private information, even through hostile external organizations or governments. For the safety of the interim committee members and for the safety of individuals involved in cases, the Foundation requires this anonymity to reduce these risks. However, the members of the committee have been identified to the Ombuds Commission, a small trusted group of community functionaries, who can confirm general details about the composition of the committee.
Q. Who will be reviewing these applications?
A. Some stewards who do not themselves intend to apply have agreed to review applications to help assess suitability to serve in this capacity. The final selection from amongst candidates they deem eligible will be made by the General Counsel.
Q. What steps are being taken to protect the privacy of individuals who lodge complaints with Trust & Safety or are accused of wrongdoing?
A. In order to even review the case files, the Case Review Committee will need to enter into a legal relationship with the Wikimedia Foundation that allows us to safely share this material. The legal documents they sign will also include a very specific non-disclosure agreement. Please see this page for a copy of the legal agreement.
Q. What kind of cases can this committee review?
A. This committee is able to review cases that are accepted by Trust & Safety for assessment under its policies that are not conducted because of statutory, regulatory, employment, or legal policies. A Foundation attorney will determine what cases are eligible for appeal. The intention of the review is to provide assurance of appropriateness and fairness for what has been termed “borderline” cases of harassment and incivility, including cases that should perhaps have been left to community governance processes. Cases where the Foundation’s attorneys assess a legal duty to act are excluded. Members of the committee do not have access to those files.
Q. Will the case review committee be able to review older cases?
A. The case review committee may review any eligible case handled by Trust & Safety regardless of whether the case was closed before or after the date the committee was established. Each case may be reviewed only once. Launching the review of a case requires that an appeal be made by an individual directly involved in a case, either in requesting the case or being the subject of the case.
Q. How does this committee work? What are its precise processes?
A. Please see the committee’s handbook for a detailed account of its processes. There is a a special account for this committee to receive appeal requests that is accessible by the committee chair and by a contractor supplied to support the committee with its communications and paperwork.
Q. Who in the Wikimedia Foundation will know the identity of committee members?
A. The Executive Director, the General Counsel, the Deputy General Counsel, the Senior Counsel supporting the committee, the Vice President of Community Resilience & Sustainability, and the contractor hired to support the committee's work have access to the finalized list of participants. One additional legal staff member required to support in finalizing and filing signed agreements also has access to this information. Each of these individuals is under a Non-Disclosure Agreement with the Foundation and aware of their responsibilities to hold this information confidential. Beyond this, there is no current intention to share this information with other staff and contractors of the Foundation; rather, steps have been taken to isolate this information, including from individuals who work on the Foundation's Trust & Safety team. There may be reasons that will arise that will require additional staff being made aware of the identities of these individuals, and thus the agreement requires that the committee members authorize sharing this information with the Foundation in general. Foundation attorneys need to remain flexible to support and protect the committee and the community and will determine if additional internal Foundation disclosure is required. The members of the committee will be advised if their identities need to be shared with any others on staff or contracted by the Foundation and why.