Wikipedia:Schiedsgericht/Chatlog Pyb
Zur Navigation springen
Zur Suche springen
Session Start: Tue Oct 31 20:02:58 2006 Session Ident: Pyb [20:02] <sebmol> ok [20:03] <sebmol> is private ok? [20:03] <Pyb> yep [20:03] <sebmol> before we begin, do you agree that I can post the contents of this discussion? [20:03] <Pyb> yes no problem [20:03] <sebmol> ok [20:04] <sebmol> i'm doing research on arbitration committees because we're considering creating one for german wikipedia [20:05] <sebmol> are you an arbitrator? [20:05] <Pyb> yes, since june [20:05] <sebmol> ok [20:05] <sebmol> how did you get into this position? [20:06] <Pyb> it was during the 3rd election [20:07] <sebmol> how long does your term last? [20:07] <Pyb> i am arbitrator for 9 month [20:07] <Pyb> but [20:07] <Pyb> one moment ;) [20:08] <sebmol> ok [20:08] <sebmol> take your time [20:11] <Pyb> we are in a transition period [20:11] <Pyb> because our first system didn't work very well [20:11] <sebmol> what was it? [20:11] * sebmol wished he could read french [20:12] <Pyb> a lot of arbitrators gave up before the term [20:12] <sebmol> oh [20:12] <sebmol> why? [20:12] <Pyb> It's a lot of work [20:13] <Pyb> a sysop can do nothing, it's not a problem [20:13] <sebmol> ah, ic [20:13] <Pyb> but an arbitrator cannot do that [20:13] <sebmol> right [20:13] <sebmol> so what has changed? [20:13] <Pyb> so we increased the number of arbitrators [20:13] <Pyb> 7 to 10 [20:14] <Pyb> but we only need 5 arbitrators for a case [20:14] <sebmol> ok [20:14] <sebmol> the term length is generally 9 months? [20:15] <Pyb> no it's 6 month [20:15] <sebmol> but your term is 9? [20:17] <Pyb> it will be 6 at the end of the transition. [20:17] <sebmol> ah, ok [20:17] <sebmol> have you been involved in any cases? [20:18] <Pyb> yes, there is two stage in the treatment of a case [20:19] <sebmol> can you elaborate? [20:19] <Pyb> yes, I don't find the word in english ;) [20:21] <sebmol> oh [20:21] <sebmol> you can try a french word here or there [20:21] <sebmol> i know a little [20:21] <Pyb> during the firsst stage arbitrators say if the ArbCom is competent [20:21] <sebmol> whether it has jurisdiction? [20:22] <Pyb> if there was no discussion before, we reject the resquest [20:23] <sebmol> ok [20:23] <Pyb> because we have also the Requests for comment [20:23] <sebmol> is that similar to request for comments on english wikipedia_ [20:23] <Pyb> yes [20:24] <sebmol> ok [20:24] <sebmol> so you don't accept cases where no prior attempt has been made to solve the problem [20:24] <Pyb> yes [20:24] <Pyb> because otherwise you will have a big amount of cases ;) [20:25] <sebmol> indeed [20:25] <Pyb> and the second stage is like the english Voting phase [20:25] <sebmol> voting phase? [20:26] <sebmol> what do you do there? [20:28] <Pyb> each wikipedians present their evidences and arbitrators decide if a wikipedian didn't respect a wiki-rule or not [20:29] <sebmol> ok [20:29] <sebmol> you said, there have to be at least 5 arbitrators involved in a case? [20:29] <Pyb> yes only 5 [20:30] <Pyb> after each case, we change the group of arbitrators [20:30] <sebmol> so they don't decide for themselves, if they want to participate? [20:31] <Pyb> no [20:31] <Pyb> but with this system the arbcom is not block because an arbitrator is not here during one or two weeks [20:32] <Pyb> it was a problem with our previous system [20:34] <sebmol> ah, ok [20:34] <sebmol> how many people have to agree on a sanction? [20:35] <Pyb> sanctions are based on consensus [20:35] <sebmol> so all arbitrators have to agree? [20:35] <Pyb> if there is a disagreement we change the sanction to take into account each point of view [20:36] <sebmol> ah, ok [20:36] <sebmol> what kind of sanctions do you impose? [20:36] <Pyb> we are not very imaginative [20:37] <sebmol> can you be specific? [20:37] <Pyb> we block the user during X a period, or he should not contribute on some articles [20:38] <Pyb> we also ask sometimes to do only one revert per twenty four hour period [20:39] <Pyb> we put on a specific page each decisions to check if users respect sanctions [20:41] <sebmol> ok [20:41] <sebmol> how many cases are there in a month or a quarter [20:43] <Pyb> one second [20:43] <sebmol> ok [20:44] <sebmol> take your time [20:45] <Pyb> we have 5-6 cases per month [20:46] <sebmol> ok [20:46] <Pyb> you have the list here http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Comit%C3%A9_d%27arbitrage/Arbitrage/Archives_du_3e_CAr [20:46] <sebmol> is there anything you would recommend for us? [20:48] <Pyb> hum, you should have a lot of arbitrators because it's not a funny task and it is time-conuming [20:48] <Pyb> consuming [20:48] <sebmol> ok [20:48] <sebmol> i hope we'll be able to do that [20:49] <Pyb> why de: needs now an ArbCom ? [20:50] <sebmol> we're looking into alternatives to our current way of handling user banishments [20:50] <sebmol> at the moment, users who do not engage in vandalism can only be banned by community vote [20:51] <sebmol> since that process has become increasingly acrimonious, we want to see, what other options are out there [20:52] <Pyb> ok [20:52] <sebmol> is there anything that you would do differently if you had the choice? [20:53] <Pyb> no [20:53] <sebmol> do you have any other comments or suggestions? [20:53] <Pyb> for the moment, no [20:53] <sebmol> ok [20:54] <sebmol> then i want to thank you very much for taking the time [20:54] <Pyb> no problem, ;) Session Close: Tue Oct 31 20:58:18 2006