[WikiEN-l] Wik and a not-quite-proposal for constitutional change

Wed May 5 13:24:22 UTC 2004

Fred Bauder wrote:
> I can't believe he left on that account. I think it was more the general
> athmosphere. The process with Wik will probably go for several rounds and
> drag on for 6 months. This is linked to the substantial support system Wik
> has among other users many of who would rebel on the other side if the
> arbitrators were seen to deal pre-emptively with him.

Where is that support system?  Who supports him?  Can they be
encouraged to pressure him into better behavior?

I don't see any reason for the process to go on for several *more*
rounds and for 6 *more* months.  At some point, very soon, he just
needs to be banned, and that's that.

I share the concerns that people have expressed about the speed (or
lack thereof) of our current processes.  I do not have a good idea for
a solution, but I think that quickpolls do offer us one promising
alternative, one that is currently growing "organically" because it
works.

I'm not (quite) making a proposal here, but just tossing out an idea
that I've been mulling over for a few days.

We could change the role of the arbitration committee to be more of a
'Board of Appeals'.  The purpose of the board of appeals would be to
potentially overturn decisions made by quickpolls.  Then quickpolls
could be used for rapid banning, and people who feel that they have
been unjustly banned could appeal to the board of appeals.

The issue of burden of proof would not change.  That is to say, the
appeals board, as with the current arbitration committee, would be
obliged to approach each case with an 'innocent until proven guilty'
mentality.  Their range of options as to actions to take would remain
the same.

What would be different is how users are dealt with during the
intermediate period between the trouble starting and final
adjudication.  If a quickpoll indicates a ban, the user is banned
unless and until the appeal is successful.

A successful appeal might not overturn the quickban, exactly, but
rather be our institutional method of accepting a person's promise to
change their behavior in specific ways.

Legitimate appeals might be "I didn't do it," or "I did it, but it
wasn't against the rules," or "I did it, and I'm sorry, I won't do it
again."

--Jimbo