sannse wrote:
This is not about avoiding lawsuits. This just about finding a way to ban people from editing Wikipedia in a way that respects our internal culture.
And (I hope) about finding a way to avoid banning people in the first place!
Absolutely! I was on a bit of rant there.
My goals for the procedure are of course all about keeping and extending the peace, and a culture of mutual helpfulness, and the prevention of the need to ban people any more than absolutely necessary.
We want a procedure that is widely viewed as credible and fair, so that even if people disagree with a specific decision, they will agree that the process is worth supporting.
(Even my retaining a right of executive clemency or pardon, is something that I would exercise judiciously, deferring to the decision of the committee in almost all realistic cases, even if I didn't *quite* agree. I only want everyone to understand that I intend to be there to keep the process from going wildly haywire with dozens of bans per month or whatever.)
However, and I think that Alex and I agree much more than my rant yesterday would suggest, I really want to make sure that our putting in place a process does not give rise to anyone thinking that they suddenly have new legal rights to edit the Wikipedia website, regardless of the wishes of the other users, or regardless of the final decision of the Wikimedia Foundation.
--Jimbo