This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ched (talk | contribs) at 10:14, 23 May 2021 (start keeping notes for WP:AP3). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 10:14, 23 May 2021 by Ched (talk | contribs) (start keeping notes for WP:AP3)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)My page to deal with all things Arbcom:
IMO thoughts
very rough draft here, but some passing thoughts.
- There should be a minimum effort at DR prior to filing a case (outside emergency actions). Be it 3 or 4 or whatever number should be decided upon, there should be some community review at some DR board. (AN, AN/I, etc.)
- I think that once a case has been accepted, then anyone wishing to offer evidence should be added to the case, and their own actions should be open to review
- Arbs and former arbs should not be contributing evidence unless the case involves them directly, and they should be added to the case party list if they do
- Absolutely NO arb (past or present) should be stating "I think editorx should be sanctioned" outside the active arbs in the PD vote.
- I think some sort of appeal process should be instituted. Especially when new evidence/facts/circumstances come to light post PD.
- NO arb should incite, encourage, or even hint at another editor filing a case; either on-wiki, or especially off-wiki. If an Arb feels a case should be filed, then they should have the integrity to file it themselves and stand as a party to the case. Anything less is unbecoming.
Rough drafts
- to review for formatting, content, and flow of posts.
WP:ARBREX references
WP:AP3
- Prep for WP:AP3
- ANI: JzG Incivility
- WP/AE: JzG
- ANI: Snark and Bite