Wikipedia:Schiedsgericht/Chatlog Pyb

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