Re: [Wikitech-l] Switching to elections for the Code of Conduct Committee?
Hi Kunal, On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 2:36 PM Kunal Mehta wrote: > I think it really depends for what kind of a makeup of committee we're > looking for. I'd like to see the committee staffed with active > Wikimedia developers who are familiar with our community norms, and > then diversity across background/geography/employer/etc. I'm not sure > whether an election is really the best way to create that kind of a > committee. > I agree that diversity across a lot of different measures is good to have, whether it's done through elections or otherwise. Personally, I think it would be a big improvement if the Code of Conduct Committee were to include at least person from the so-called "Enterprise MediaWiki" community: people who use or develop MediaWiki outside of the Wikimedia Foundation or any Wikimedia site, such as people who run it at their company. I think it would bring a perspective that may be lacking in the committee at the moment (just judging from the current members' short bios), and could help to prevent some kind of ideological lockstep from forming. If it's not done through elections, maybe it could be done through a quota system or something... -Yaron ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Switching to elections for the Code of Conduct Committee?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi, On 6/18/19 3:24 PM, Yaron Koren wrote: > That's what I'm writing about: I now think that the committee > should be decided via open elections, instead of having the > committee appoint itself. At the moment, this group has a complete > lack of accountability: they could make any decision whatsoever at > any time, and, according to the rules, there is literally no one > who can stop them. With every passing year and additional "renewal" > (that's what it's called), [3] it seems to me that their legitimacy > as representing the views of the overall community decreases. I don't agree with your conclusion, but I understand and somewhat agree with having a bit more turnover/change in the makeup of the committee. But my understanding is that there simply has been a lack of candidates stepping forward. In the discussion for 2018 candidates[1], Dereckson said that there were only 3 applications for people not already on the committee, and 11 total for 10 spots. Maybe Amir or another committee member can shed some light on what the situation was like this year. I think even less people are likely to stand for an election than in the current selection process. > So, what do people think - is there any kind of significant support > for the idea of elections for the CoC Committee? I think it really depends for what kind of a makeup of committee we're looking for. I'd like to see the committee staffed with active Wikimedia developers who are familiar with our community norms, and then diversity across background/geography/employer/etc. I'm not sure whether an election is really the best way to create that kind of a committee. In any case, so far I've personally been happy with the candidates and don't yet see any reason for change. [1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Ub92clsm4nuzuvzl - -- Legoktm -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEE2MtZ8F27ngU4xIGd8QX4EBsFJpsFAl0LmeAACgkQ8QX4EBsF JpsxmhAAw23iSuZcx9YqmNb1Paz7PFZit7e/sQ1GUE5tgz44Vl/Ren36bTVzVJSw URS9rzwD/JENaOnknwuB28YkfSsK+JKQJiPGLj+suquxDAVfy5HziQfwImMLCFXY 1ocg6BFqqv3ZwUxAS4M+WDxEHa/FLYFGhGf3xFdZf1IyXpTNot3+T5MdBByi6Wln gAmHXTl8Cuvf3A1hu0VbaXjzmJlcDUh8YDAMGOUXQUeC+1MCHxcreZKVKOyGki9p +XzahqTQXjM5byWjiNLiTNSLXgb4Ihb9eDWSF2OrkuNmm1lOdpmYlVtFvRuslPCI IWw/KV7ZKnGFJWiiP69k/XuyxKUIpnEjSOpVdiA8iqeNaA/2kEipCgfb45oeHvcw ByaJMVoLO3W1dpz03gsntENycjCN+HQukOwGr/Zig9vlBGgRsT1RhzglCKjcWhyV kJN2+vZ4huepbD5TWXdtxzWZInRrnhP9XCduZJUAvyrHzJDqRPm5QtlJBQ82Rl7d kF60yF4C/bWsABdj4oCx/JpE5g7eJUwLNRnlkiCvWsgYYcespPrUGb1jyYgz633K wanCpiMt0wrmfBM8XwOslcQ4ppSjz5srd+TSqZD+Rk98EacZjQyqqioQJRn4Ed2+ Y/vuRqwHtwYE06ftvOcziMfG8xgB+pu7SBQMpG13Tw9FnbZsFP0= =J83m -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Switching to elections for the Code of Conduct Committee?
Hi, I would like to address the proposal for Technical Code of Conduct Committee elections in general terms, without discussing specific incidents. When selecting candidates for powerful public bodies such as the Technical Code of Conduct Committee, I think that considerable public scrutiny is appropriate. There are a variety of ways that this level of scrutiny could be applied, and I think that public elections are one option that is worth considering. However, I also encourage us to be mindful that a public political process of elections can have the unfortunate side effect that candidates who become members of the Committee and want to retain their roles for additional terms feel obligated to submit to political pressure to make decisions regarding the conduct of specific users based on popular opinion instead of what they believe is correct based on their (one would hope carefully and skillfully considered) evaluation of facts. Thank you for raising this topic for discussion. Pine ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine ) ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
[Wikitech-l] Switching to elections for the Code of Conduct Committee?
Hi, The Wikimedia technical spaces Code of Conduct is enforced by a committee. That committee's selection process is defined as follows: "The first Committee will be chosen by the Wikimedia Foundation’s Technical Collaboration team. Subsequent members and auxiliary members of the Committee will be chosen by the current regular members through a majority vote." [1] About a month ago, the CoC Committee put up a slate of "candidates", and was soliciting feedback on them. The decision on these candidates was supposed to happen on June 12, last week. I don't know if it actually happened - I didn't see an announcement, and the candidates page is still up. [2] In any case, I doubt any of these candidates will have trouble getting through, since these candidates are also, for the most part, the people deciding who gets in. That's what I'm writing about: I now think that the committee should be decided via open elections, instead of having the committee appoint itself. At the moment, this group has a complete lack of accountability: they could make any decision whatsoever at any time, and, according to the rules, there is literally no one who can stop them. With every passing year and additional "renewal" (that's what it's called), [3] it seems to me that their legitimacy as representing the views of the overall community decreases. I had a strange personal experience that made me start to think about this. Pretty soon after they requested feedback a month ago, I sent en email to the CoC Committee giving my negative view about one member of the committee, and explaining why I thought they shouldn't remain there. The committee responded a few weeks later by saying they were rejecting my feedback - which is their right - but then spent the rest of the email criticizing my own previous behavior. Which I found bizarre. Thinking about it later, it seems to only make sense as what's known in American business as "circling the wagons" - a group of people responding to outside criticism in a defensive way, by rejecting all of it, attacking the critics, etc. Which is not the kind of thing you want to see from people who are supposed to be making rational, unbiased decisions. Now, it could be that I'm making too much of this one interaction - maybe some people there were just having a bad day - but there's still the larger question of whether elections make sense, and to some extent it's a question that's independent of whatever you think of the people currently on the committee. As for the mechanics of voting: one option is to give one vote to anyone who has a Wikimedia developer account. The vote could be held on wikitech.wikimedia.org, or perhaps there's an even better technical solution. The key thing for now is just to get a sense for people's views on this. So, what do people think - is there any kind of significant support for the idea of elections for the CoC Committee? -Yaron [1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct/Committee [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct/Committee/Members/Candidates [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct/Committee#Creation_and_renewal_of_the_Committee ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
