Board Thread:Community Voting/@comment-5111283-20160102235754

Since the policy seems rather grey in this area, and no one really can give a straight answer either way it seems like a good idea to dispel with the squabbling and set some rules in stone in order to keep future issues easier to deal with and appropriately respond to them.

Although I would personally rather keep the discussion and proposition of blocking/un-blocking users off-Wiki, reasons.

In the ever-desired increase of democracy and community involvement I propose we add this to our rules:

"A community vote cannot be used to ban, un-ban, block or un-block users, however, in the case of blocks a petition to the Admins can be made that a user be blocked/unblocked. In the case of a block petition there must be supporting evidence* posted with the petition. In the case of an unblock petition there must be a statement written why the user should be unblocked with solid reasoning, evidence would be beneficial, but is not required. Using the same voting determination used on Community Votes, if the vote has the appropriate support the Admins must view the evidence and vote/re-vote on the block. However, their vote is not required to align with the Community Vote and the outcome may be the same as before or it may be different."


 * In this case an exception is made to this General Policy rule:

"Chat logs of users breaking the rules or doing humiliating things should not be posted on blogs. They should be given to an admin in private, and should not be given to the community in any way. Humorous logs may be posted if they are not intended to humiliate anyone."

A. Yes, add the above to the rules.

B. No, do not add the above to the rules.

C. Other

Discussion is welcome, if there is support for a different method then by all means propose and we can re-vote or whatever if enough support is shown.

Anyhow, the reason I propose this method is that users' judgement is often clouded by emotion and bias, given this is often most damaging and has most severe of an impact in the situation of blocking/un-blocking a user, given that Admins are supposed to be the trusted, least biased users of the Wiki entrusted by the Wiki's users with matters and expected to handle them with a clear mind and maturity they would seem to be the best fit to make the finial decision on them. Also, in the case of a serial troll or spammer, action must be taken as quickly as possible, given this the Admins must be able to act swiftly without the need of a long drawn-out community vote. And in the case of long-standing users, time must be allowed to potentially take longer to review evidence and discuss it, or to take swift action if something immediate is happening.

 