I don't really have anything to add, but I think Fae makes some good
points here.
On 12/07/14 08:04, Fæ wrote:
On 12/07/2014, Russavia <russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com> wrote:
...
the door completely with their backdoor continued accusations which are
made without a shred of proof.
Referring to Richard's post, the general list guidelines apply[1] and
there is an explanation of the admin role[2]. However neither of these
documents sets a policy for whether administrators on this list have a
duty to reply to emails from a participant when they ask why they have
been moderated or blocked, nor whether they have to give an
explanation when action is taken so that the person being moderated or
blocked can have the opportunity to understand the issue, change their
behaviour and have a path to get unblocked or unmoderated.
As with Russavia's case above, there may be people who are thought to
be problematic due to a history on Wikimedia projects, perhaps they
will always be unwelcome on this list, however the vast majority of
bans or moderated accounts ought to be based solely on evidence of
posts to this list. However, there is no downside to letting people
ask the question "why was I moderated?" or go on to appeal moderation
or a ban if they wish, preferably as a public process so that others
affected are free to comment with evidence. It may be beneficial to
consider adding a project whereby moderation or banning can be
requested publicly, rather than by closed emails.
I still hold the view that a policy beyond the standard general
nuts-and-bolts guidelines which ensures a greater level of
transparency compared to the de facto closeted and apparently
sometimes silent process we have settled for, would be of benefit to
all contributors of this list.
Links
1. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
2. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Administration
Fae
I guess the way I see it, there will always be exceptions, but anyone
worth letting (back) on the list in the first place probably deserves at
least some sort of transparency.
The overhead required to actually do that could prove problematic,
though. I don't know.
-I
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
