Der Inhalt dieser Seite ist nicht mehr aktuell. Sie wird aber nicht gelöscht, damit die Geschichte des Schiedsgerichts der Wikipedia nicht verlorengeht. Falls es sich um eine Arbeitsunterlage handelt, ist sie womöglich durch andere Seiten ersetzt worden. Bestehende Weiterleitungen auf diese Seite sollen das Wiederauffinden ermöglichen.
Wenn du meinst, diese Seite sei weiterhin von aktueller Bedeutung, solle weiter benutzt werden und ihre Funktion sei nicht besser in bestehende Seiten integriert, dann kümmere dich bitte um ihre Aktualisierung.
Session Start: Tue Oct 31 20:02:58 2006
Session Ident: Pyb
[20:02] <sebmol> ok
[20:03] <sebmol> is private ok?
[20:03] <Pyb> yep
[20:03] <sebmol> before we begin, do you agree that I can post the contents of this discussion?
[20:03] <Pyb> yes no problem
[20:03] <sebmol> ok
[20:04] <sebmol> i'm doing research on arbitration committees because we're considering creating one for german wikipedia
[20:05] <sebmol> are you an arbitrator?
[20:05] <Pyb> yes, since june
[20:05] <sebmol> ok
[20:05] <sebmol> how did you get into this position?
[20:06] <Pyb> it was during the 3rd election
[20:07] <sebmol> how long does your term last?
[20:07] <Pyb> i am arbitrator for 9 month
[20:07] <Pyb> but
[20:07] <Pyb> one moment ;)
[20:08] <sebmol> ok
[20:08] <sebmol> take your time
[20:11] <Pyb> we are in a transition period
[20:11] <Pyb> because our first system didn't work very well
[20:11] <sebmol> what was it?
[20:11] * sebmol wished he could read french
[20:12] <Pyb> a lot of arbitrators gave up before the term
[20:12] <sebmol> oh
[20:12] <sebmol> why?
[20:12] <Pyb> It's a lot of work
[20:13] <Pyb> a sysop can do nothing, it's not a problem
[20:13] <sebmol> ah, ic
[20:13] <Pyb> but an arbitrator cannot do that
[20:13] <sebmol> right
[20:13] <sebmol> so what has changed?
[20:13] <Pyb> so we increased the number of arbitrators
[20:13] <Pyb> 7 to 10
[20:14] <Pyb> but we only need 5 arbitrators for a case
[20:14] <sebmol> ok
[20:14] <sebmol> the term length is generally 9 months?
[20:15] <Pyb> no it's 6 month
[20:15] <sebmol> but your term is 9?
[20:17] <Pyb> it will be 6 at the end of the transition.
[20:17] <sebmol> ah, ok
[20:17] <sebmol> have you been involved in any cases?
[20:18] <Pyb> yes, there is two stage in the treatment of a case
[20:19] <sebmol> can you elaborate?
[20:19] <Pyb> yes, I don't find the word in english ;)
[20:21] <sebmol> oh
[20:21] <sebmol> you can try a french word here or there
[20:21] <sebmol> i know a little
[20:21] <Pyb> during the firsst stage arbitrators say if the ArbCom is competent
[20:21] <sebmol> whether it has jurisdiction?
[20:22] <Pyb> if there was no discussion before, we reject the resquest
[20:23] <sebmol> ok
[20:23] <Pyb> because we have also the Requests for comment
[20:23] <sebmol> is that similar to request for comments on english wikipedia_
[20:23] <Pyb> yes
[20:24] <sebmol> ok
[20:24] <sebmol> so you don't accept cases where no prior attempt has been made to solve the problem
[20:24] <Pyb> yes
[20:24] <Pyb> because otherwise you will have a big amount of cases ;)
[20:25] <sebmol> indeed
[20:25] <Pyb> and the second stage is like the english Voting phase
[20:25] <sebmol> voting phase?
[20:26] <sebmol> what do you do there?
[20:28] <Pyb> each wikipedians present their evidences and arbitrators decide if a wikipedian didn't respect a wiki-rule or not
[20:29] <sebmol> ok
[20:29] <sebmol> you said, there have to be at least 5 arbitrators involved in a case?
[20:29] <Pyb> yes only 5
[20:30] <Pyb> after each case, we change the group of arbitrators
[20:30] <sebmol> so they don't decide for themselves, if they want to participate?
[20:31] <Pyb> no
[20:31] <Pyb> but with this system the arbcom is not block because an arbitrator is not here during one or two weeks
[20:32] <Pyb> it was a problem with our previous system
[20:34] <sebmol> ah, ok
[20:34] <sebmol> how many people have to agree on a sanction?
[20:35] <Pyb> sanctions are based on consensus
[20:35] <sebmol> so all arbitrators have to agree?
[20:35] <Pyb> if there is a disagreement we change the sanction to take into account each point of view
[20:36] <sebmol> ah, ok
[20:36] <sebmol> what kind of sanctions do you impose?
[20:36] <Pyb> we are not very imaginative
[20:37] <sebmol> can you be specific?
[20:37] <Pyb> we block the user during X a period, or he should not contribute on some articles
[20:38] <Pyb> we also ask sometimes to do only one revert per twenty four hour period
[20:39] <Pyb> we put on a specific page each decisions to check if users respect sanctions
[20:41] <sebmol> ok
[20:41] <sebmol> how many cases are there in a month or a quarter
[20:43] <Pyb> one second
[20:43] <sebmol> ok
[20:44] <sebmol> take your time
[20:45] <Pyb> we have 5-6 cases per month
[20:46] <sebmol> ok
[20:46] <Pyb> you have the list here http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Comit%C3%A9_d%27arbitrage/Arbitrage/Archives_du_3e_CAr
[20:46] <sebmol> is there anything you would recommend for us?
[20:48] <Pyb> hum, you should have a lot of arbitrators because it's not a funny task and it is time-conuming
[20:48] <Pyb> consuming
[20:48] <sebmol> ok
[20:48] <sebmol> i hope we'll be able to do that
[20:49] <Pyb> why de: needs now an ArbCom ?
[20:50] <sebmol> we're looking into alternatives to our current way of handling user banishments
[20:50] <sebmol> at the moment, users who do not engage in vandalism can only be banned by community vote
[20:51] <sebmol> since that process has become increasingly acrimonious, we want to see, what other options are out there
[20:52] <Pyb> ok
[20:52] <sebmol> is there anything that you would do differently if you had the choice?
[20:53] <Pyb> no
[20:53] <sebmol> do you have any other comments or suggestions?
[20:53] <Pyb> for the moment, no
[20:53] <sebmol> ok
[20:54] <sebmol> then i want to thank you very much for taking the time
[20:54] <Pyb> no problem, ;)
Session Close: Tue Oct 31 20:58:18 2006
