The following statement is Wikimedia Taiwan(WMTW)'s response to the
announcement "Board of Trustees on Next steps: Universal Code of Conduct
(UCoC) and UCoC Enforcement Guidelines
The below statement has also been approved in the WMTW board meeting on May
1, 2022. We sincerely invite the Wikimedia Foundation and all Wikimedians
to review and comment.

We urge the Foundation board to consider the official ratification and
enforcement of the current version of the Enforcement Guidelines, and
continue the conversation and refinement based on the community feedback
and concerns during the implementation. As an affiliate in the Wikimedia
Movement, we (the WMTW) understand that the Wikimedia movement places more
emphasis on consensus-building rather than a pro forma democracy of
majority vote. However, the vote was nearly 60%(58.6% versus 41.4%), not an
extremely small difference of 50.1% versus 49.9%. From the experience of
Chinese Wikipedia, it is detrimental to our movement in a situation like
this; a situation of overemphasizing the strong opposition in order to gain
more consensus, and ignoring the opinions of the ones in favor.

The Chinese Wikipedia has long faced the problem of strong opponents
occupying discussions on guidelines or the content of articles. When facing
controversial issues, it is easy to overrule the majority as long as a
small number of users support each other and form strong opinions to
express oppositions. They often invoke guidelines such as "Wikipedia is not
a testing ground for democracy
<>" and "Voting is
not a substitute for discussion
<>", claiming that
the majority of opponents still need to reach a consensus with the
minority; but when others try to communicate with them, they often refuse
to open the conversation by giving lengthy debates, until the volunteers
give up on the discussion due to fatigue. In Chinese Wikipedia,  such
long-term so-called GAME behavior has led to a failure of internal
community management mechanisms. It is not easy to push for changes
regarding policy and guidelines, it is difficult to stop the vandalism, and
these even led to well-intentioned editors leaving the movement. All of
which contributed to the Foundation's action on Chinese Wikipedia last year

If UCoC's enforcement of the guidelines has to be postponed because of
receiving objections, it raises doubts about the Foundation's credibility
with the communities. In the re-run of the community vote, will it be
delayed again due to strong opposition, regardless of the outcome? Does
this case also encourage potential spoilers whose behavior will be affected
by the UCoC to continue to find reasonable excuses to freeze the
enforcement process, making the UCoC become a mere formality? Does it imply
that in the re-run of the community vote, it does not matter if the
communities participate actively or not, because the  supporting opinions
won't be given equal respect anyway?

If the current version of the enforcement guideline can be ratified and
implemented first, and take a conservative approach towards the strongly
challenged content temporarily, as well as shorten the time frame for the
first iteration reviews, this should be able to show respect to the voting
result, and also give those reasonable opinions a chance to be
incorporated. This is in line with the consensus spirit of the Wikimedia

This open letter was written in Mandarin by WMTW Secretary General Reke
Wang (User:Reke) <>, approved
by the WMTW Board, and translated by Joyce (User:Joycewikiwiki)
<>, our
International Coordinator
Wikimedia-l mailing list --, guidelines at: and
Public archives at
To unsubscribe send an email to

Reply via email to