Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Alex Shih (talk | contribs) at 07:04, 13 November 2018 (→Questions from Alex Shih: +follow up). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Individual questions

Add your questions below the line using the following markup:

#{{ACE Question
|Q=Your question
|A=}}

Question from Softlavender

2. What has been the most rewarding aspect of your time spent on ArbCom? Softlavender (talk) 02:33, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

   I think ArbCom is rewarding in the same way as working in other administrative tasks on Misplaced Pages. It comes down to seeing a value in volunteerism by contributing to your community and a project you believe in. Most administrative tasks on Misplaced Pages are mundane and routine. ArbCom is no different. However, we have dealt with some dark situations during my two-year term. Some days I did not even want to open my inbox. Other days I found myself getting up in the middle of the night to write emails or make conference calls. Making a difference, even if it is just for one person in a way that no one will ever know about, will always be an important and meaningful contribution for me. One that I am willing to do so others can edit and write content.

Question from Peacemaker67

2. Given you weren't involved in looking at the German War Effort case this last year, I'm interested in your thoughts about the decision of your fellow Arbs to take it on, particularly given the lack of prior attempts to deal with the identified behaviours through the usual dramaboards? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:04, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

   I am not very familiar with the case and most likely I will not have enough time to thoroughly review everything but I will look it over and get back to you with my comments.

Questions from Alex Shih

2. Is it the role of the committee to serve the community, or is it community's role to serve the committee? This is related to the following comment: (). My question to you is, do you agree with AGK's rebuttal to your colleague there? Further, what will you do, if re-elected, to ensure that the committee stays closer connected with the community?

   The Arbitration Committee serves on behalf of the community. There are certainly statements that are more helpful than others but I think my record shows that I generally encourage and wait for the individuals involved and the community to have the opportunity to weigh in before making a decision: and especially here. I cannot say that we have a particularly efficient system but any arbitration process requires a substantial amount of review. The process is open to the community and it is our responsibility "to gauge the views of the community and the parties" and make a decision.
   
   WT:ACN is an under-utilized venue with the potential to improve communication between the community and the committee. I made an effort there to respond to inquiries from the community when possible. An overall higher degree of participation there would make the committee was more accessible to the community. In addition, there have been a number of proposals to update some of our procedures and processes. Bureaucracy can be tedious and boring, but for anyone willing, I hope community consultation will remain a part of that process.

   Speaking of community consultation, as a side question here do you think the current system of CUOS appointment requires any reform? The recent CUOS community consultation revealed many misunderstandings from experienced members of the community in the process, noticeably the idea that 1) It is not supposed to be RfA-like process 2) The final decisions are made through private voting by the committee, where the result of the community consultation process was inconsequential as we have witnessed in the result. Alex Shih (talk) 07:04, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

4. Do you agree with Courcelles's answer to my question here (), in particular the part about the level of conduct on the mailing list "should be held in an atmosphere or respect for each other, the matter under discussion, and respect for non-subscribers who are mentioned". If yes, what will you do, if re-elected, to ensure this expected level of conduct continues to be maintained on the mailing list?

6. What is your stance on improving the transparency of ArbCom, and the target dates for drafting cases? For example, if a deadline will be missed, should the drafting arbitrator inform the community that the deadline will be missed, or should they wait until someone from the community to bring it up?

Question from Cinderella157

2. Arb policy makes a requirement for transparency and Arb cases make an explicit statement of intent to reach a "fair" decision.
   1. What are, in your opinion, the "principles and spirit" (per WP:5P5) that underpin the policy and statement?
   2. The policy in particular, requires "detailed rationales for decisions related to cases". Please comment on this duty as it might apply to you (say, as a drafting arbitrator) and the committee as a whole, in respect to how this duty is discharged (noting the underlying principles), particularly where the evidence presented might be in conflict.
   3. Do you consider that this duty has been complied with and what might you do to improve compliance?

Cinderella157 (talk) 09:28, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Question from Gerda Arendt

2. Can you agree with Opabinia regalis here? Try to look as if you never saw it ;)

   I think this is a really interesting question because the case request was in October 2017. Three months later Joefromrandb and others was accepted and eventually resulted in two restrictions placed against Joefromrandb.
   
   Hindsight is always 20/20 but given the circumstances at the time, I think it was the right decision to decline the case request. OR's comment was the catalyst that changed the mind of everyone to decline the case. Her advice to Joefromrandb was well reasoned and sadly if followed might have resulted in a very different outcome in March 2018. I also agree with her opinions about civility and how in certain contexts it has been weaponized under a singular interpretation which has in some cases led to considerable disruption and permanent damage.

Questions from Collect

2. Does opening a case imply that "sanctions must be applied"?

4. If an arbitrator is not disinterested in an editor (such as openly and strongly criticizing an editor's edits on the editor's talk page) has the arbitrator ceased to be impartial with regard to such edits?

6. Is it ever proper to allow an "accused" an extremely short period of time to respond to accusations made when the editor was actually far from home for an extended period, such as offering under three days to respond to several thousand words of "new accusations"? Ought the "clock be stopped" in order to allow fully reasoned responses to such "new accusations" and "new evidence"? And where an arbitrator provides their own evidence in a "proposed decision," ought the accused be permitted to actually reply to such "new evidence"?

Questions from 28bytes

2. Hi Mkdw. What are your thoughts on this situation? In general, what factors do you think the committee should take into consideration when deciding whether to pursue an allegation that a high-profile editor is using a sockpuppet account to evade a topic ban? Did the committee make the right decision in this case? (Additional context here.)

4. Recently an editor placed links to offsite court documents involving an ArbCom candidate on that candidate's question page. Without commenting on this specific case (unless you want to), what factors would you take into consideration when determining whether to allow or suppress similar links in an ArbCom election, or an RFA, or an AN/I report?

Question from Liz

2. Hello, Mkdw. As you have previously served or are currently serving on the Arbitration Committee, will you state what you believe is biggest misconception most editors have about how ARBCOM works? What do you think editors SHOULD know about the operation of ARBCOM and how arbitrators collaborate that we probably don't realize? Any aspect of ARBCOM's operation that you would change if you could? Thanks and good luck! Liz 00:58, 13 November 2018 (UTC)