Code of Conduct/Commission/Election/2017/Question

From Meta
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Questions for All Candidates[edit | edit source]

How much transparency do you want to see in the Commission's operations?[edit | edit source]

How much transparency do you want to see in the Commission's operations? None at all, a mention that the Commission was operating or not in any given month, full disclosure of all discussions, something else? --Robkelk (talk) 20:35, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

I believe that full disclosure is slightly a step to far for any violations the commission must deal with that are deemed sensitive or contain sensitive information. All reports should be kept confidential unless a reporter wishes themselves to be made public. Discussions, I believe, should be disclosed but any names should be censored or removed. I also believe that all decisions relating to punishments made by the commission should be disclosed. Miraheze Logo.svg CnocBride | Talk | Contribs 20:54, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Everything that is confidential information (such as real names, emails, etc.) should not be disclosed publicly. The decisions that are made could be revealed. If it is a delicate case (threats, attacks, etc.), that should be treated confidentially and avoid disclosing any details of the case to other unauthorized users. —Alvaro Molina ( - ) 22:08, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
I agree with @AlvaroMolina and @CnocBride MacFan4000 (talk) 22:47, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Ditto. I agree with both comments. Miraheze is all about transparency, however, in delicate situations such as an investigation into, for example, threatening behaviour, the details of the investigation should not be disclosed until after a decision has been made. Any sensitive information should be omitted prior to being published. Certain details of the investigation would always have to be published for transparency reasons otherwise it could be construed that commission members, or even Miraheze as a whole, were dishonest and/or had something to hide. I have no reason to believe that would ever be the case but "people" can be over sensitive and take things the wrong way. Borderman (Talk) 01:29, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Insofar as complete disclosure is possible, I would default to it, but in matters regarding sensitive information like personally identifying details, those should be redacted, with an explanation what was redacted if possible. GethN7 (talk) 14:49, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Further questions for any nominee willing to answer[edit | edit source]

What is your reason(s) for choosing to be a Commission member?[edit | edit source]

  • Because I believe that I can be of help resolving the cases that come to the Commission, I have the necessary experience for the work and also I also have enough time to be able to meet the needs that arise within the Commission. I also work constantly with email, so in that area I would not have problems either. —Alvaro Molina ( - ) 02:36, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
@AlvaroMolina: Is the experience you have relevant to other wikis or is it something you do in the real world? Borderman (Talk) 10:01, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
@Borderman: In Wikimedia wikis where I am an administrator (and in some, bureaucrat) I sometimes have to deal with cases like this, recently I have not faced such situations since the circumstances have not occurred, but in some occasions of the past I have addressed them, so I would not have problems dealing with complex or delicate situations. —Alvaro Molina ( - ) 12:56, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
  • One of my main goals on Miraheze is too just help the community. I have done so through my activity on Phabricator and on the Meta wiki and I wanted to continue this further by joining the Code of Conduct commission. I check Met and Phabricactor at least 3 times on weekends and at least once during week days so I believe I am active enough to have a seat on the council. My experience with the community will benefit me greatly on the commission. Miraheze Logo.svg CnocBride | Talk | Contribs 09:42, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Having had to serve as an impartial voice for my own community in many cases, I would like to do so for Miraheze as a whole. GethN7 (talk) 14:56, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Originally I wasn’t going to run for the role but &CnocBride nominated me and I thought I would help out and accept it. MacFan4000 (talk) 20:22, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Why do you think you are right for the role?[edit | edit source]

  • Because I have the necessary experience to be able to deal with the cases that may reach the Commission, I was one of the users that supported the creation of the CoC, something that was necessary to ensure good coexistence among users who are part of the community of Miraheze, as well as to avoid harassment and possibly personal attacks among users. —Alvaro Molina ( - ) 02:45, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
  • I believe I am right for the role because of my experience on Miraheze and dealing with various community disputes. I always try to give the fairest deal possible to everyone and I believe this skill is necessary on the CoC for arbitrating disputing parties. Miraheze Logo.svg CnocBride | Talk | Contribs 09:45, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
@CnocBride: I agree with working towards the fairest deal and I can see that in the way you compose some of your comments. Is there an example (other than the recent Amanda ban appeal) where you have established yourself as someone with experience dealing with problematic issues and/or users? Borderman (Talk) 10:10, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
I believe myself able to step outside my own bias if my duties require it and judge situations as fairly as possible, giving information of all sides equal consideration before making a decision, and in matters such as enforcing a CoC, I believe to be essential to being a good enforcer of such a role. GethN7 (talk) 14:56, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Because I think I can really make a difference. MacFan4000 (talk) 20:22, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Have you ever held a position such as this before?[edit | edit source]

  • No, for that reason, I think this could be a good opportunity to show that I have the necessary skills to be able to assume the responsibility that this position has. —Alvaro Molina ( - ) 02:47, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
  • I believe that the CoC is similar to RFQ's on ban appeals and other things like that. You are dealing with disputes but the CoC is different as it will be dealing with more sensitive issues, so no I have not held such a position before but all nominees have experience with analyzing community disputes such as ban appeals. As Alvaro said above I believe I do have the skills to work well with CoC members and ensure its efficiency. Miraheze Logo.svg CnocBride | Talk | Contribs 14:43, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
  • No, I think I would do well though. MacFan4000 (talk) 20:22, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

How would you best mediate problematic users?[edit | edit source]

  • I believe that whenever there are conflicts between users, the best thing is always, in the first instance, to encourage dialogue between the parties involved and to give their point of view on the problem; later try to seek to generate agreements between the parties with the aim of being able to resolve the conflict. Always maintaining an attitude of respect. —Alvaro Molina ( - ) 02:50, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
  • I would do my utmost to give consideration to lenity where such is warranted, have all sides make their case in event of dispute, then render a judgment based on such information, with my decision tempered by the collegial opinion of my peers in the event of matters requiring consensual affirmation. GethN7 (talk) 14:56, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Agreed with @GethN7 and @AlvaroMolina MacFan4000 (talk) 20:22, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Alvaro said above dialogue is probably the best option to mediate problematic users. I believe that arbitration is necessary and hearing both sides of the story is necessary to make a right and just decision. I always base my decisions that are fair and are not biased between any parties and I must say I will promise to abstain from any discussion if any user may influence my decision. When I say influence I simply mean I will abstain from a discussion if I actually work with a user who is currently in discussion. Miraheze Logo.svg CnocBride | Talk | Contribs 10:19, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

What have you done to enhance Miraheze services / help other users?[edit | edit source]

  • During these last months I have contributed to Miraheze as Wiki Creator, attending the wikis requests that arrive daily, and in some occasions I have helped in Phabricator and GitHub with the requests of features and extensions for the wikis. Also in IRC, sometimes I attend to new users who are looking for help. —Alvaro Molina ( - ) 02:55, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
  • I have helped out plenty on phab and github. I am a wiki creator and Meta Translation Administrator. MacFan4000 (talk) 20:22, 12 November 2017 (UTC)