This is mostly a positive development, I think. The overall recognition
that the correct way forward is a community vote is excellent, as is the
agreement that the community must be able to review and modify the texts in
the future. I have a few concerns on the details of the vote:
1. In order to ensure a fair vote, I would recommend that the vote be
administered by a group other than WMF T&S, given that T&S would likely be
strongly biased toward preferring a particular outcome. Ideally, it would
be run outside the WMF entirely, since the WMF is clearly very invested in
having this approved. Perhaps the Elections Committee could do it?
2. The 50% threshold, while not entirely without precedent (the licensing
update vote also required 50%), is unusual. Depending on the type of
policy, thresholds have usually ranged from 60% to as high as 80%, if I'm
remembering correctly. This, combined with the unprecedented step of
allowing potentially hundreds of non-editor staff to participate in a
decision directly affecting the projects, is concerning.
I am worried about the potential for ambiguity and/or confusion following
this, especially in the context of the Board's earlier actions in this
area. For example, while the WMF and Board have repeatedly suggested that
the UCoC is in force (throughout official communications and elsewhere), it
is as a matter of simple fact and actual practice, not a policy on the
Wikimedia projects. Given that the local projects' administrations do not
take instructions from the WMF, and the lack of any community approval of
the suggested policy text so far, the only effect of the WMF position
(outside of the affairs of the WMF and those inclined to follow the
organization's lead) is confusion and doubt about the WMF's
cooperativeness. In a matter such as this, clarity is important, and I hope
we can have a clear outcome recognized by all. The decision on whether to
approve the UCoC and associated enforcement guidelines must be a legitimate
community decision, broadly recognized. The Board's statement that it will
follow the outcome of a vote is a good thing, but this should be
accompanied with actions to ensure that it is a vote that will be
recognized as a fair and valid representation of the communities' will.
-- Yair Rand
בתאריך יום ב׳, 24 בינו׳ 2022 ב-16:36 מאת Shani Evenstein <
shani@wikimedia.org>:
Hello everyone,
(This statement is available on Meta-Wiki for translation and wider
distribution)
Today, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees published a statement
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/January_2022_-_Board_of_Trustees_on_Community_ratification_of_enforcement_guidelines_of_UCoC>
supporting a community vote on the proposed enforcement guidelines
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Enforcement_guidelines>
for the Universal Code of Conduct
<https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct> (UCoC).
One of the key recommendations
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations/Provide_for_Safety_and_Inclusion>of
the strategic goals for 2030 was the collaborative creation of a UCoC to
provide a global baseline of acceptable behavior for the entire movement
without tolerance for harassment. The global Wikimedia community must
work well together in producing knowledge resources for the benefit of the
world. Forging welcoming, inclusive, harassment-free spaces in which people
can contribute productively and debate constructively is critical for the
movement’s success.
The Board continues to stand by its May 2020 statement
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/May_2020_-_Board_of_Trustees_on_Healthy_Community_Culture,_Inclusivity,_and_Safe_Spaces>
on “Healthy Community Culture, Inclusivity, and Safe Spaces” that,
“harassment, toxic behavior, and incivility in the Wikimedia movement are
contrary to our shared values and detrimental to our vision & mission” and
to our joint strategic goals
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations>
for 2030.
The ratification of the collaboratively created UCoC last year was a
notable milestone, and hopefully the discussion on the ratification process
for the collaboratively created enforcement guidelines proposal today
will lead to another one.
The enforcement guidelines proposal is a major achievement of thoughtful
co-creation for the global communities that took part in the months of
consultations, the volunteers leading the drafting committee itself, and
the Foundation. The Board is very grateful to the volunteers and staff
members who collaboratively co-created first the UCoC itself that the
trustees ratified last year, and now the enforcement guideline proposal.
While the UCoC is already in effect, the completion and ratification of
the guidelines will allow everyone to begin a period of assessing how they
function, in action. We should collectively discover where both the
original document and the pathways to enforce it work well and where they
need to be improved. Once the guidelines are adopted, communities and the
Foundation will begin to collect information on how they are working for
the subsequent review of both after a year.
The Board strongly supports the proposal made by the joint letter of
Arbitration Committees
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Letter_from_Arbcoms_to_the_Board_of_Trustees>
for community voting on the enforcement guidelines proposal prior to the
Board’s own ratification of the final guidelines. Trustees also recognize
the support of such a vote expressed by surveyed volunteer functionaries,
affiliate members, and the drafting committee.
Based on their input, and aligned with processes used for the Wikimedia
Foundation Board Elections, all registered Wikimedia contributors who meet
minimum activity requirements, affiliate and Foundation staff and
contractors (employed prior to 1/17/22), and current and former Foundation
trustees, will have the opportunity to vote on the enforcement guidelines
proposal in SecurePoll.
A threshold of above 50% support of participating users will be needed to
move on to Board of Trustees ratification. If the majority of voters oppose
the adoption of the guidelines as written, they will be asked which
elements need to be changed and why. This would allow for another round of
edits to address community concerns prior to another vote, if needed.
Both the UCoC and the enforcement guidelines (after ratified), will also be
open for review and voter-endorsed amendments annually.
The Board asks every member of the Wikimedia communities to continue
creating a safe and welcoming culture that stops hostile and toxic
behavior, supports people targeted by such behavior, and assists good-faith
people.
The Board believes these enforcement guidelines, once finalized, will be
an important step in encouraging productive work on the Wikimedia projects.
The Board hopes that you will step in to review and provide your feedback
and thoughts in the vote, so that the ratification process can start with a
strong preliminary approach.
On behalf of the Board,
Shani Evenstein Sigalov
Vice Chair, Board of Trustees.
Chair, Community Affairs Committee.
Shani Evenstein Sigalov
<https://wikimediafoundation.org/profile/shani-evenstein-sigalov/>
Vice Chair, Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org