How would you suggest modifying the process so that it is compatible with community governance? Note that while I'm dissatisfied with the system that is in place now, I doubt that there will be a perfect solution that is free from all possible criticism and drama. I would give the current system a grade of "C-" for transparency and a grade of "F" for its compatibility with community governance. I don't expect ether grade to get to an "A", but I would be satisfied with "B" for transparency and "B+" for community governance.
Pine
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Adrian Raddatz ajraddatz@gmail.com wrote:
Wikimedia isn't a country, the global ban policy isn't a law. Any such metaphors are honestly a bit ridiculous. The WMF bans are, for the most part, sensitive. And that means that they all need to be, because if you have a list of reasons that you can disclose, then any bans without comment are going to be on a very short list of quite serious reasons. Plus, the ones without a reason would still have the "wikipediocracy-lite" crowd that seems to dominate this list in a fuss.
It's also worth noting that the WMF provides some basic details of global bans to certain trusted community groups. The issue isn't with disclosure, it's with mass disclosure.
On Feb 17, 2017 11:09 AM, "Pine W" wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
I am glad to hear that WMF global bans are processed through multiple people. Still, I am deeply uncomfortable with the lack of community involvement in this process as well as the lack of transparency. In the
US
we don't trust professional law enforcement agencies to make decisions about who should go to jail without giving the accused the right to a
trial
by a jury of their peers. Unless we have lost faith in peer governance (which would be a radical break with open source philosophy) I think it
is
both unwise and inappropriate to have "the professionals" make these decisions behind closed doors and with zero community involvement in the process.
I am in favor of professionals working on investigations, and in enforcement of community decisions to ban *after* those decisions have
been
made by the community through some meaningful due process. I oppose
letting
"the professionals" decide among themselves who should be banned. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe