Thanks to Rod, Deryck and to those who have responded off-list. I'm very happy to incorporate these concerns and questions into my response to the survey.
Can I just check - both in terms of those who have already responded and those who haven't - do you agree with my view that there needs to be a final ratification process of the enforcement guidelines? Cheers Lucy On Fri, 26 Nov 2021 at 11:08, Rod Ward <r...@rodspace.co.uk> wrote: > Hi Lucy et al, > > > > I would echo some of Deryck’s concerns and would also suggest considering: > > · The need for anonymity in some cases and WMF office type > actions without the “accused” being able to have their say (or even be > aware they are being investigated) – The power of WMF office actions in the > online space may go against the nature of consensus building and developing > a collegiate culture (which is surely part of the purpose of the UCoC). > > · The provision of training for those running events etc – > presumably WMUK will need to provide this (not just train the trainer, but > also for programme staff, trustees and presumably the wider community) we > need to consider when, where, how etc and how this will be carried out and > monitored – will some of those who have been running events for years be > unable to do this until “training” received? Presumably Level 1 will be > sufficient for most people? I am not quite sure what the note “Having a > level of training should not be construed as holding the level of community > trust required to perform the actions covered under the training” means and > how it will be interpreted. > > Rod > > > > > > *From:* Deryck Chan [mailto:deryckc...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* 26 November 2021 10:24 > *To:* UK Wikimedia mailing list > *Subject:* [Wikimediauk-l] Re: Universal Code of Conduct - Ratification > of Enforcement Guidelines > > > > Hi Lucy and all, > > > > I have commented on the draft Enforcement Guidelines in my individual > volunteer capacity and would be very happy for WMUK to incorporate my > comments into our affiliate response. > > > > The draft Enforcement Guidelines (and the Universal Code of Conduct) fill > a much-needed gap in Wikimedia community governance. Currently, volunteer > disputes that cannot be resolved amicably at a local project level have no > recourse of escalation except with Stewards or WMF Trust & Safety, whose > only guiding legal text is the Terms of Use. I strongly support their > enactment. That said, I think a few areas of the current draft can be > improved further: > > - The mechanisms of escalation from local project dispute resolution > to Wikimedia-wide arbitration, and de-escalation vice versa, ought to be > laid down at least in principle if not in detail. This may involve a > hierarchy of contact points between local projects and global arbitration. > This is not explicitly mentioned in the current draft and as such the > guidelines are vulnerable to double jeopardy or forum shopping. > - The right to be heard during case proceedings (as contrasted to the > right to appeal, after a judgement and sanctions have already been handed > down) should be enshrined into the guidelines. > - I would like to see the proposed arbitration mechanisms claiming > competence (in the legal sense) over cross-wiki content disputes (as > related to UCoC policy section 3.3) that cannot be resolved at a local > project level. > - The guidelines are still in draft but its terminology is already > getting unwieldy, e.g. U4C, EDGR, Code Enforcement Officer. These ought to > be rationalised to minimise misinterpretation in rollout. > > Best regards, > > Deryck > > > > On Thu, 25 Nov 2021 at 10:09, Lucy Crompton-Reid < > lucy.crompton-r...@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote: > > Dear all > > > > I have been asked by the Wikimedia Foundation to complete a survey about > the draft Enforcement Guidelines > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Enforcement_draft_guidelines_review> > for the Universal Code of Conduct. In particular, they are seeking input > about whether or not it is necessary to hold a final ratification process > with communities and affiliates. The survey also asks us to highlight any > concerns about the draft guidelines. > > > > My understanding is that there will be one survey for each affiliate to > complete, rather than multiple responses. Given that, I want to make sure > that I respond in a way that best reflects the views of UK volunteers and > contributors, not just me and the staff team. I have some questions and > comments about the guidelines, but moreover I do think that there should be > a ratification process involving the people who will be required to > formally consent to the Code (who are listed here > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Enforcement_draft_guidelines_review#Recommendations_of_UCoC_Consent_amongst_Community_and_Foundation_Staff:>). > > > > > If you are at all interested in/looking forward to/concerned by the > introduction of the Universal Code of Conduct, this is an opportunity to > express your views. It would therefore be useful to know your thoughts on > any or all of the following points, ideally by the end of next week (3rd > December): > > - To what extent you think that the draft Enforcement Guidelines are > acceptable > - If you have any concerns about the draft guidelines and the > recommended processes > - If you think there should be a final ratification of the guidelines > for communities and affiliates > > Please note that these questions are specifically about the > draft Enforcement Guidelines, not the Universal Code of Conduct itself. > > > > Thanks and best wishes > > Lucy > > > > > > > > -- > > Lucy Crompton-Reid > > Chief Executive > > > > *Error! Filename not specified.* > > <https://donate.wikimedia.org.uk/> > > *Wikimedia UK* <https://beta.wikimedia.org.uk/> is the national chapter > for the global Wikimedia open knowledge movement. > > Wikimedia UK is a Registered Charity No.1144513.Company Limited by > Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. > > Registered Office Ground Floor, Europoint, 5 - 11 Lavington Street, > London SE1 0NZ > <https://maps.google.com/?q=5+-+11+Lavington+Street,+London+SE1+0NZ&entry=gmail&source=g> > . > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk > > > > > <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> > > Virus-free. www.avg.com > <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk -- Lucy Crompton-Reid Chief Executive <https://donate.wikimedia.org.uk/> Wikimedia UK <https://beta.wikimedia.org.uk/> is the national chapter for the global Wikimedia open knowledge movement. Wikimedia UK is a Registered Charity No.1144513.Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Office Ground Floor, Europoint, 5 - 11 Lavington Street, London SE1 0NZ <https://maps.google.com/?q=5+-+11+Lavington+Street,+London+SE1+0NZ&entry=gmail&source=g> .
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
