Talk:Trust and Safety/Policy

Comments Regarding Current Trust And Safety Appeals Process
Hi everyone,

I'm posting this message as I've taken a look at the recent appeals process for Trust and Safety-related incidents, and found that the process allows for zero discretion and no appeals based on changed behavior or patterns of competent actions. I'd like to hear what all of you have to say about the current process, because to me, it seems extremely strict and doesn't allow for any flexibility or discretion that Stewards have when dealing with bans or restrictions appeals. Do any of you have any thoughts? Thanks - BrandonWM (talk • contributions • global • rights) 16:25, 1 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I think there should be some degree of discretion for considering appeals, particularly if significant time passes and depending on the nature of the issue. I don't see why the current terms of appeal need to be as exacting, indefinitely; I see room for allowing consideration of 'circumstantial/behavioral change' in cases where certain restrictions apply when it seems they are just no longer necessary to achieve their goals. It reads as a rather 1984 procedure that is unmirahezian compared to the standard processes of other areas depending exclusively on flaws in the original procedure instead of considering the fact people will grow with time (not always in all ways, but often enough to at least come to a new consensus as the individual, team, circumstances and platform changes). This isn't to advocate for just having a timer expire to allow appeal automatically without other factors. For disclosure I have bounced these ideas privately with Brandon before posting here. --Raidarr (talk) 16:34, 1 December 2022 (UTC)