User:Biblioworm/ArbCom improvement proposals

Policy amendment: Eliminating ArbCom's responsibility for certain matters

In accordance with the prescribed amendment procedure, the "Scope and responsibilities" section of Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy is amended as follows:

1. The Arbitration Committee hereby approves the removal of point (4) and of point (5)(i) of said section. The Arbitration Committee shall no longer have responsibility for "matters unsuitable for public discussion for privacy, legal, or similar reasons," nor shall it have the responsibility to "approve and remove access to ... CheckUser and Oversight tools."
   • With regard to the matters listed in point (4), off-wiki harassment and child protection issues are, for the purposes of this motion, within the scope of such matters.
   • With regard to point (5)(i), functionaries shall be henceforth be elected by the community. Accordingly, the "CheckUser/Oversight permissions and inactivity" section of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures is removed in its entirety.
2. Should this motion be passed, the community shall consider, in accordance with the formal amendment procedure, whether to ratify this proposed policy change.
3. Should the community ratify this amendment, the removal of point (4) shall only take effect if and when the Wikimedia Foundation expresses, through an official channel, its willingness and readiness to assume the responsibility of managing such matters.

Procedural amendment: Streamlining the Arbitration Committee's procedures

Effective immediately, various sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures are amended as follows:

1. §Auditing: This section is removed in its entirety. Henceforth, the global ombudsman commission shall address all complaints against functionaries.
2. §Opening of proceedings: Before proceedings commence, an arbitrator shall be appointed to formulate a scope for the case, in the same manner that arbitrators are appointed to draft final decisions. The case scope shall be succinctly stated as a question (or questions) which the Committee shall consider and address in its final decision. In the course of a case, the Committee may amend a case's scope via motion. In all cases, all issues addressed in the final decision shall have relevance to the case scope.
3. §Target timetable for proceedings: To promote expediency, the evidence and workshop phases shall be conducted simultaneously. The target time for the conclusion of the evidence and workshop phases shall be one week after the date of the case's opening. The Committee or the drafting arbitrator(s) may, unilaterally or upon request, lengthen or shorten the target times for a specific case.
4. §Submission of evidence: Only named parties may submit evidence on the /Evidence page. Non-parties may, on the accompanying talk page, comment on the evidence that has been presented, although all editors must post their statements in their own sections and shall not post more than 250 words in their respective sections, responses to other editors included.
5. §Editor participation (new section): When the Committee is deliberating whether to accept or decline a case, editors who are not named parties to the case may submit statements at the case requests page. Non-parties who wish to make such statements must confine their statements to their own section, and may not post more than about 150 words in their respective sections.

By default, any editor may propose and discuss principles, findings of fact, and remedies on the /Workshop page without any numerical restrictions.

Non-arbitrators may, on the accompanying talk page, make statements regarding the proposed decision, but all non-arbitrators wishing to make statements shall post their statement in their own sections, and shall post no more than about 250 words in their respective sections.

On all case pages, Committee clerks reserve the right to alter or remove inappropriate material. They may respond to particularly egregious behavior by imposing restrictions, up to and including a ban from participating in the case.

Procedural amendment: Due process in Arbitration Enforcement

Effective immediately, the "Enforcement" section of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures is amended as follows:

1. No Arbitration enforcement request shall be closed and/or actioned unless and until twenty-four (24) hours have elapsed since the filing of the enforcement request.
2. If forty-eight (48) hours have elapsed and fewer than two uninvolved administrators have expressed an opinion on the request, the request shall be closed without action. Without exception, all Arbitration Enforcement requests must be closed by administrators who are entirely uninvolved in the dispute at hand.
3. These requirements do not preclude uninvolved administrators from imposing blocks under the regular blocking policy, if urgent circumstances (i.e., egregious behavior which would violate policy even without ArbCom sanctions) independently warrant it.

Procedural amendment: Allowing motions by the community

Effective immediately, the "Motions" section of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures is amended as follows:

1. Henceforth, any editor may propose motions on Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions. The motions page shall be divided into two sections: "Arbitrator motions" (for motions initiated by arbitrators) and "Community motions" (for motions initiated by editors who are not members of the Committee) The procedure for arbitrator-proposed motions shall not change. However, community motions shall be subject to the conditions enumerated below:
   • Endorsements: Any motion must be endorsed by at least three arbitrators within seventy-two (72) hours of its posting. Arbitrator endorsements shall take the form of ordinary "support" votes. If the motion fails to attain the requisite number of endorsements within the prescribed time period, it shall be closed.
   • Recycled proposals: If a proposed motion is unsuccessful, an identical (or practically identical) motion may not be introduced by any non-arbitrator until January 1 of the following year. Clerks may remove, without discussion, any motion which they deem to violate this condition.
2. Unless and until a community motion has satisfied the arbitrator endorsement requirements, the motion need not be announced on the Committee's noticeboard, the administrator's noticeboard, or arbcom-I.