Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2012/Candidates/Carcharoth/Questions: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Carcharoth (talk | contribs) →Question from Piotrus: reply |
|||
Line 268:
====Question from Piotrus====
=====Civility enforcement questionnaire=====
Or more of a request: I'd appreciate it if you'd take part in the [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Civility enforcement/Questionnaire]], or if you decline, say here why you consider this questionnaire not to be worth your time. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> reply here</font>]]</sub> 18:12, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
:'''A''': You may be aware that [[User:My76Strat|My76Strat]] asked a number of people (I think those that commented at the Civility Enforcement case) if they would be willing to fill in this survey. My response so far is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Carcharoth&oldid=526630970#Information here] (static version). As I said there, I've decided not to take part in this survey. I've re-read the talk page and the further comments made there (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Civility_enforcement&oldid=526476070#Civility here onwards], static version). The range of responses so far is the most interesting thing, and I hope something useful does come out of it. On a more general (and possibly more important point), I don't think issues such as civility should be thrashed out during election season. It politicises the debate, when what is needed is a broad cross-section of the editing community (i.e. not just election candidates) debating the issues and coming up with workable strategies and approaches. ArbCom only deals with the worst disputes the community can't deal with, and neither ArbCom nor ArbCom election candidates can (or should) rewrite policy, even ones that may need rewriting or clarifying (in part because they may be called upon to interpret those policies if elected). A distinction should additionally be drawn between policy ''enforcement'' and policy ''drafting''. See also what I said above in my 'Addendum on civility' in [[Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2012/Candidates/Carcharoth/Questions#Questions_from_Boing.21_said_Zebedee|this section]] of the questions. [[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] ([[User talk:Carcharoth|talk]]) 02:15, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
::Thanks for your reply. I have some additional questions on a somewhat different matter below. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> reply here</font>]]</sub> 22:28, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
=====Additional questions=====
# when would you see a full site ban (full block) as a better choice then a limited ban (interaction, topic, etc.)? You are welcome to combine your answer to this with my subsequent question:
# on a related note, a while ago I wrote a mini wiki essay on when to block people (see [[User:Piotrus/Morsels_of_wikiwisdom#When_to_use_the_banhammer_-_and_when_not_to:_a_simple_math|here]]). Would you agree or disagree with the views expressed there, and why?
# to an extent we can compare the virtual wiki world to the real world, what legal concept would you compare a full site ban to? (As in, an interaction ban is to a restraining order what a full site ban is too...?)
# do you think there is an analogy to be drawn between site banning (full block) and incarceration?
# do you think the United States justice model with the highest incarceration rate in the world ([[List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate]] is something to applaud or criticize?
Thanks, --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> reply here</font>]]</sub> 22:28, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
| |||