--- Anthere <anthere9(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
One issue is time. As you said, AC conclusion is often
a very short time
of banning. When this time is over, the game is on again. May I suggest
that decisions taken by AC are two steps ones ?
That is why we have started to issue enforcement rulings that place users under
a type of probation after their initial ban. With Wik, it was the possibility
of a month ban if we determined he violated the terms of his probation (some of
which is for an indefinite term).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Wik2/Decide…
Say a case is considered by AC
After a while, AC admits there is an issue, and that it is worth doing
something, say banning for 1 week. The AC is important here, because we
trust they make fair decisions, after they studied the case thoroughly
Could not the AC take 2 decisions at the same time ?
* first, immediate banning for perhaps 1 week
* second, additional decision already taken for "repetition of issue".
After the banning time is over, if the user starts being problematic,
and is reported by xx contributors (perhaps 5 ?), the AC immediately
release the second decision (perhaps 1 month banning).
- Either it is applied on the spot (that means that within ONE day 5
contributors could report and the user be banned again).
- Or the second decision (taken by AC perhaps 2 weeks sooner during
initial arbitration) is voted by contributors (agree, disagree, no
opinion) during a few days. if there is general agreement, the AC second
decision is applied.
That is almost exactly what we have done with Wik2, except the month banning is
at the discretion of the AC.
-- mav
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/