Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:30, 1 November 2007

Question from I

1. What, if anything, do you believe is wrong with the current arbitration process, and/or the committee? This includes anything related to the committee and its actions. If appointed, what do you intend to do to resolve these issues? i  03:29, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

   Answer: By far the most serious problem with the arbitration process as currently administered is the excessive length of time that it takes to consider and decide many cases. As best I can tell, this has been an ever-present issue ever since ArbCom was created in 2004. It was of sufficient concern to me last year that my own standard question to all of last year's candidates was "what can be done to reduce the delays in the arbitration process?", and you will have seen that I refer to this problem in my candidate statement this year.

   During 2007, though the substance of the Arbitration Committee's decisions in the various cases have generally been reasonable, it has taken far too long for the committee to arrive at many of these decisions. In some important cases, the level of hostility between feuding users mounted as their back-and-forth continued on the arbitration pages themselves for week after week; this even includes instances where we may have lost users from the project as a direct result. I know it is easy for me to say this from my current vantage point, but a pattern of protracted and unnecessary delays in deciding cases can defeat the entire purpose of establishing a high-level committee of experienced and respected editors to provide a fair and expeditious resolution to disputes, and should not be permitted to continue.

   If elected, what I will do to help resolve this problem is give a high priority to my work as an arbitrator and provide my input in case evaluation and decision as promptly as possible, although of course only while giving all parties to the case and other interested editors a full opportunity to have their views and evidence considered. I would also urge other arbitrators to provide their input in a reasonably timely manner (although as I have learned as a Clerk, there is probably a very thin line between urging cases forward in a helpful way and simply nagging in a way that gets one tuned out).

   I have also given some thought to whether there ought to be a model timetable for cases that arbitrators should bear in mind (say, a week for the parties to present evidence; then an arbitrator should post a proposed decision within X days and all active arbitrators are expected to comment or vote within Y days, etc.). My current thinking is that such a framework would be too rigid given the variety in the types and complexity levels of cases that are brought to arbitration, but perhaps the committee will have to revisit implementing such a timetable, at least aspirationally, if nothing else seems to work.

Questions by Jaranda/Jbeach56

• What do you think about self-admitted alternative accounts, see User:MOASPN, and User:Privatemusings as an example? Jbeach 03:32, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• Answer: According to our policy on sockpuppets and alternate accounts, use of an alternate account to comment on a particular topic is permissible, provided that the user is not also commenting on the same topic with his or her primary account so as to create an illusion of greater support for a given position than actually exists. The community has generally viewed this as acceptable, if not optimal, user conduct given the controversial nature of some topics that are discussed from time to time. In such situations, the editor operating the two accounts should ensure that none of Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines are broken, either by either of the two accounts individually, or if the two accounts' edits are considered as a whole.

• What do you think of Misplaced Pages Review? Jbeach 03:32, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Answer: Well, it is hard to know just what I should say about the website that recently discussed my potential candidacy for the Arbitration Committee, in which one contributor opined that I could become Misplaced Pages's Gorbachev while another said that I reminded him or her of "a Senator-on-the-verge-of-becoming-Emperor Palpatine."

Misplaced Pages Review is a forum of varying quality, just as one would anticipate given the wide variety of people who contribute to it. From time to time, WR has offered reasonable, or at least arguable, criticism of Misplaced Pages and its editors. Other times, some of WR's content has been seriously off-target and misguided, containing too many threads replete with factual errors coupled with hatred, anger, and vitriol. One of the reasons WR is so uneven is that its contributors include both individuals who acknowledge Misplaced Pages's role while seeking to improve specific aspects of our policies or performance, but also include others who are outright hostile to the existence of Misplaced Pages and would support doing virtually anything to promote our destruction.

Unfortunately, whatever valuable role Misplaced Pages Review might play as a source of constructive criticism is seriously overshadowed by the participation of several WR contributors (both on that site and elsewhere) in seeking to uncover and reveal the real-world identities of Misplaced Pages editors who choose and sometimes need to edit Misplaced Pages anonymously. Such "outing" of editors can enable both online and real-world harassment and represents a serious threat to our editors' privacy and well-being. If Misplaced Pages Review wishes to enhance its position as a forum for responsible criticism of Misplaced Pages and its leadership, the site and its contributors should immediately and definitively cease this practice.

Questions from Heimstern

My questions are kind of nitty-gritty, but I'm not looking for really specific answers as much as trying to see your thought process and approaches to the issues.

1. What is your philosophy on how to handle edit warriors? Under what circumstances should the Committee ban users who continually edit war, and when should they use lesser sanctions, such as paroles or editing restrictions? What factors should the Committee consider in deciding what sanctions are appropriate?

2. What about uncivil editors (including those making personal attacks)? What factors should the Committee consider in deciding whether and how to sanction them?

3. When should an administrator be desysopped? In particular, how should a sysop's failings be weighed against his or her useful administrative actions, and when do the failings merit removal of adminship? When, if ever, is it appropriate to use a temporary suspension, such as was used in Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Jeffrey O. Gustafson?

4. Under what circumstances should the Committee consider an appeal of a community ban?

5. Two recent cases, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Allegations of apartheid and Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/THF-DavidShankBone, were dismissed with no decision made after the Committee had been unable to come to a decision concerning wrongdoing or sanctions. In both cases, the arbitrators seem to have felt that the cases' issues were no longer current, either because the community had resolved the issue or because a participant was no longer active at Misplaced Pages. Now, consider a similar situation in which the Committee cannot agree on finding concerning user conduct or on appropriate sanctions, but in which the case issues are clearly current What should be done in such a case?

Thanks for your consideration. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 03:56, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Question from Ragesoss

In the Misplaced Pages context, what is the difference (if any) between NPOV and SPOV (scientific point of view)?--ragesoss 04:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Questions from east718

1. Do you feel that the Arbitration Committee takes too long to close cases? Or do you feel that they act too hastily and some important facets of cases occasionally fall through the cracks? Either way, what will you do to remedy it?

   Answer: I do believe the committee has taken too long to resolve many cases. I have provided some thoughts about this problem in my response to User:I above.

   Although a less serious problem, at other times the committee has sometimes failed to address an aspect of the case. However, there often are legitimate reasons for the arbitrators not to address every aspect of a dispute in their decision, and this is a matter on which the arbitrators' judgment and discretion can come into play. The solution to this situation, when it arises, is for arbitrators who believe that an issue has been overlooked to raise the additional issue, either on the workshop, in the proposed decision, on a talkpage, or if appropriate on the arbitrators' private mailing list. Arbitrators who follow the arbitration pages for input from the parties and other interested editors are also able to take note when someone expresses the concern that something has been overlooked.

1. You touched briefly on this in your statement, but how do you feel your experience as a lawyer will affect the performance of your arbitration duties? Thanks, east.718 at 04:27, 11/1/2007

   Answer: In some ways, I think my experience as a lawyer will be helpful to me as an arbitrator, while in other ways I think that I am more-or-less the same editor (and would be more-or-less the same arbitrator) that I would have been had there been an Internet and a Misplaced Pages when I was starting my career 20 years ago, and so it shouldn't matter very much.

   If working as a litigator has taught me one thing, it is that there are two or more sides to every story, and two or more perspectives to be considered in just about every dispute, whether in the real world or on Misplaced Pages. It has also taught me the importance of carefully reviewing all the evidence and arguments in a case before reaching conclusions. In my work as a Clerk, my experience has probably aided me in understanding and applying some of the complexities of the arbitration procedure (which is not at all to say that the procedures should be applied in a legalistic or formalistic way). I also think that my years of document drafting experience would be helpful in crafting decisions.

Questions from Majorly

These are generic questions, so apologies if you've answered them elsewhere :)

1. How do you think that your personality would make you a good arbitrator?
2. Do you have any experience in real life that could relate to activities arbitrators have to deal with?

Thanks for your time. Majorly (talk) 14:23, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Questions from Picaroon

• Under what conditions should non-arbitrators be granted access to the arbcom mailing list? Former members, checkusers/oversights who have never been on the committee, board members, others?

Answer: I don't have a strong view on this one way or the other, in part because although I have a general idea of what this mailing list is used for, I haven't had access to know the specifics. My impression is that this list is used for several purposes. One of these is private arbitrator discussion and deliberation regarding specific cases pending before the committee. Another is general discussion of topics, sometimes including highly sensitive topics and private information, that needs to be discussed in a confidential way by community leaders. Including individuals in the latter type of discussion should not be problematic so long as the recipients are carefully selected and so long as all mailing list participants refrain from using their access to the mailing list to exercise undue influence on pending cases in which they are parties.

• Please list the total number of alternate accounts you have used, and please list the usernames of as many as you feel comfortable making public.

Answer: None. Other than maybe 15 or 20 non-controversial IP edits before I registered, I have only edited as User:Newyorkbrad.

• Under what circumstances should a case be heard completely via email, as opposed to onwiki? Under what conditions should the committee block a user without making public the full extent of the reasoning (for example, this user)?

Answer: On-wiki discussion is preferable unless there are concrete and specific reasons for taking an action off-wiki. In the case of the indefinite block of User:Melsaran, I do not know the reasons for the action taken beyond the limited information that has been disclosed on-wiki, and therefore don't have a strong view on whether the matter could responsibly have been handled through a fully on-wiki process, nor am I in a position to opine that things should have been done differently. To the best of my knowledge, Melsaran has not requested that the discussion be moved on-wiki, which tentatively suggests that he might accept that the matter was better addressed in a non-public fashion.

• Under what circumstances should the committee implement an indefinite ban on a user? Under what conditions should probation/supervised editing be instituted instead of a ban of any duration?

• What constitutes a wheel war? Was the Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/BJAODN situation a wheel war? How about Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Sadi Carnot and Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Alkivar? Thanks for your time, Picaroon (t) 16:07, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Questions from Sean William

1. In your opinion, what is the best way to deal with revert-warriors brought before ArbCom?
2. What is your opinion about revert parole (1RR limitations, etc.)?
3. What is your opinion about civility parole (also known as personal attack parole)?

Thanks. Sean William @ 16:12, 1 November 2007 (UTC)