Template:CharterVote2/35/Discussion

< RETURN TO THE MAIN PAGE

See Also the discussion about the appeal process in Article 39

Revised article guaranteeing rights to fair hearing and identifying sanctions.

• Whenever possible, disputes shall be settled informally at the lowest possible level. Specifically, the following shall apply:

1. Any party involved in a dispute may contact the Ombudsman for assistance in dispute resolution.
2. When a formal decision is necessary or demanded, the Ombudsman shall facilitate the presentation of the issue to the appropriate body, Editorial Council for content disputes, Management Council for disputes involving violation of the rules.
3. The Management Council shall provide a formal mechanism of resolution that allows each disputant to fully and thoroughly present their relevant positions.   All citizens shall have the right to a fair hearing, which shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following: the opportunity to present one's case in one's defense, the right to be heard by a fair and unprejudiced body, the right to have others offer testimony on one's behalf.
4. Citizens understand that the Editorial Council and the Management Council may impose sanctions that include blocking a citizen's access to Citizendium, removing or altering content, or terminating the citizen. The Management Council and Editorial Council may from time to time devise additional sanctions as appropriate.
5. Citizens shall not have arbitrary or excessive sanctions imposed upon them.

I removed the strikeout and struck out "Citizen understand" and replaced "include" with "result in" because include seemed to give the EC the power to block an account which I think should only be for behavior and needs some MC/constable intervention to occur. The EC, however, may make a decision that, if not followed would result in the user being blocked. D. Matt Innis 17:26, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

• Whenever possible, disputes shall be settled informally at the lowest possible level. Specifically, the following shall apply:

1. Any party involved in a dispute may contact the Ombudsman for assistance in dispute resolution.
2. When a formal decision is necessary or demanded, the Ombudsman shall facilitate the presentation of the issue to the appropriate body, Editorial Council for content disputes, Management Council for disputes involving violation of the rules.
3. All citizens shall have the right to a fair hearing, which shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following: the opportunity to present one's case in one's defense, the right to be heard by a fair and unprejudiced body, the right to have others offer testimony on one's behalf.
4. The Editorial Council and the Management Council may impose sanctions that result in blocking a citizen's access to Citizendium, removing or altering content, or terminating the citizen. The Management Council and Editorial Council may from time to time devise additional sanctions as appropriate.
5. Citizens shall not have arbitrary or excessive sanctions imposed upon them.

• Agree. D. Matt Innis 17:26, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
• Agree. Russell D. Jones 17:31, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Add:

• When a dispute concerns content, it may be referred to an Editor with jurisdiction as defined by the Editorial Council. If the Citizen disagrees with that Editor's ruling, if there are multiple Editors for the subject, the next step is to consult the group thereof, assuming there is a response within seven (?) days. The Editorial Council will resolve matters not settled by this mechanism.

Howard C. Berkowitz 16:12, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I like this idea because it brings the editors in. But it's too detailed for my taste. Besides, this article deals only with procedures applicable to both types of disputes. Isn't there language already empowering the editors to act is this way? Isn't there language already for appealing the actions of editors? But I agree that "settled informally at the lowest possible level" could probably be defined. How about in the first line it says: Russell D. Jones 17:13, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

• Whenever possible, disputes shall be settled informally at the lowest possible level. This means involving a subject-matter Editor, or the group of subject-matter Editors, to resolve questions of content between Authors or involving the Ombudsman for other disputes. Specifically, the following shall apply:

Or: D. Matt Innis 17:33, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

• Whenever possible, disputes shall be settled informally at the lowest possible level. For content disputes among Authors, this means involving subject-matter Editors. The Ombudsman shall be available to resolve other types of disputes. Specifically, the following shall apply:

That's good, except I wouldn't exclude the Ombudsman from facilitating communications between Authors and Editors. Howard C. Berkowitz 17:35, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

WHAT?? didn't you (or maybe it was somebody else) just yesterday say that the Om can't get involved in content disputes? I think the Om could get involved in any type of dispute, but if it's about content the prudent Om will tell the disputants to work it out with the editors. Russell D. Jones 17:46, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Wasn't me. "Work it out with the XXX" can still be facilitated by a respected person that says "I don't know much about fruits and vegetables, but, as an observer, it seems to me that both Ms. Editor and Mr. Author agree there are tomatoes, but they are arguing about To-MAH-to versus To-MAY-to. Perhaps it's worth avoiding a pronunciation guide for now or presenting two alternatives?" Howard C. Berkowitz 18:43, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

• Whenever possible, disputes shall be settled informally at the lowest possible level by subject matter Editors. Specifically, the following shall apply:

Agree. D. Matt Innis 19:37, 22 July 2010 (UTC)