Requests for Comment/Amendments to Canvassing Policy

Following recent passage of the Wiki Governance policy, the concept of canvassing was formalized as explicitly forbidden instead of a generally-held community taboo.

While the initial language was narrow in scope and prohibitions, Wikipedia's standards on canvassing make clear several gaps in our policy compared to its much more expansive definition.

This draft serves to catalogue potential improvements already identified by the community and give an opportunity to solicit feedback, I encourage the community to review and comment on the existing proposals as well as suggest new ones that may not have yet been identified.

NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 18:46, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Proposal 1: Expansion of Scope
Amend current Canvassing policy to start with: The following actions are prohibited in regards to any request requiring community vote: Convert existing prohibitions into a list below this preface statement.

Rationale: The current policy only covers RfPs despite the prior community taboo applying to essentially every type of RfX where a vote is taken. This language broadens policy to match that understanding and future-proof against new process that should develop for other types of requests. NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 18:46, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Proposal 2: Clarification on Private Asks
Amend current language as follows: Privately asking individuals or groups of users to support or oppose a request is prohibited.

Rationale: The current policy only covers requests for support, not opposition. This clarifies that campaigning in either direction is prohibited and clarifies that both individual and group asks in private are not acceptable. NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 18:46, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Proposal 3: Prohibition on Public Campaigning
Add the following prohibition, following private asks: Once a request is open for voting, public and explicit asks for votes of support or opposition are prohibited. This prohibition is not venue-specific (e.g. on-wiki vs discord), but does not cover good-faith debate taking place on the request itself.

Rationale: Current policy doesn't cover things like campaigning for votes to support or oppose a particular policy in either Miraheze-specific discord channels or wiki-specific discords. A point I would like community feedback on -- should this be limited to just the requester or a general prohibition. NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 18:46, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Proposal 4: Prohibition on Vote-stacking
Add the following prohibition: Once a request is open for voting, privately contacting individuals or groups of users to ask for participation in a request is prohibited.

Rationale: Current policy doesn't cover neutral but selective asks for participation from users with known views on a topic to achieve an intended outcome, also known as vote-stacking. NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 18:46, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Proposal 5: Clarification on Preferential Treatment
Amend the following prohibition: Promising an advantage or preferential treatment in exchange for a Support or Oppose vote is not allowed.

Rationale: Current policy doesn't cover asks of opposition in exchange for a favorable outcome, this change would correct that oversight.