User:Reception123/CoCC reform

''This page is a draft for an upcoming RfC. Please feel free to correct grammar mistakes and to add new proposals. If you would like to modify a current proposal significantly, please contact me first before doing so''

As Miraheze continues to evolve and different situations are seen, we must also adapt the global groups that were created quite a while ago, as was done with the old CVT group recently. Today the group that requires a reform is the [[Code of Conduct/Commission
 * Code of Conduct Commission]]. I have been a member of said commission since its existence and during these years have realized that it is not an effective first place to go to if there is a violation of the Code of Conduct. I am not sure whether when it was created it was intended to be the first place to go to, but the current way that the Code of Conduct Commission operates is dysfunctional and the commission is not able to resolve most cases of violations (because a commission is not appropriate for a simple case of a CoC violation). Therefore, we are left with two options: 1) to redefine the scope and the rights of the Code of Conduct Commission and make it the “court of last appeals” and direct users to the CoCC only in order appeal the decisions (or lack thereof) of other groups, or 2) more extremely to abolish the CoCC and give it’s current scope and powers to Stewards and Global Sysops. If we go for the option of redefining the scope, other global groups (or operators on IRC/Discord) would be the first to deal with cases of Code of Conduct violations and if one of the parties are dissatisfied with the decision made by the users they can ask the Code of Conduct Commission to review the case.

Proposal 1.1: Scope
It is clarified that '''The Code of Conduct Commission is the appeals body for the Code of Conduct, and a user may only contact the commission if a another group (i.e. Stewards, Global Sysops, IRC/Discord operators, etc.) has been contacted first regarding a violation and the user would like to appeal that decision. The Code of Conduct Commission's role is to review the handling of a violation by the other groups and decide whether the handling was appropriate or not. After the review is complete, the CoCC may take any action necessary against the user violating the CoCC and may impose a different sanction (or remove the current one). Users that do not show that either they have tried contacting another group first or that a decision has been made will be redirected to the other groups and will not be heard by the CoCC.'''

Proposal 1.2: Rights
Members of the Commission do not have any direct rights, however after an internal vote by the commission, it may instruct global groups or local operators to take action against a user. This action may include but is not limited to a local block, a ban (IRC/Discord) and a global lock.

Proposal 1.3: Current appeals section
The current section under Procedures for handling a case->Appealing is removed as the Code of Conduct Commission will now be in charge of appeals.

Proposal 1.4: Appealing sanctions
After the Code of Conduct Commission has made their decision, a user must wait at least three months before appealing any sanctions against them or requested that they are lifted.

Proposal 1.5: Term Limits
Due to the current lack of many active volunteers, I feel that it is best to remove the mandatory nature of term limits and instead replace it with:
 * Members of the Commission do not have mandatory term limits, however when possible it is preferable not to serve more than 3 consecutive times as a member.

Proposal 2: Abolition
The Code of Conduct Commission is abolished, all members end their terms the day after this RfC is closed if this proposal passes and Stewards, Global Sysops and any other operators are in charge of the Code of Conduct and to sanction any violations.