88:, routinely considers appeals from banned or long-term blocked users. The Appeal Committee would largely supersede and extend this role (for example, it would also consider appeals of topic bans or other restrictions). Appeals could only be considered if there is no existing consensus in the community to retain the sanction as is, and prior steps to appeal the sanction have been made. Appeals can be heard privately (through a private mailing list) or publicly, and the community should be informed when a privately heard appeal is under advanced consideration, asking for input, as well as, privately, individual users when deemed appropriate. The Appeal Committee may decrease the severity of a sanction, or lift it with conditions. If desired by the community, the Appeal Committee could also appeal deletions, when the
32:
71:
to the Appeal
Committee should reduce the workload for arbitrators and provide a more efficient, adaptable and far-reaching appeal process. The Appeal Committee would be the last step in the appeal process for community or administrative sanctions, before arbitration. The committee would be formed by
109:
Sanctions imposed directly by the
Arbitration Committee may not be overturned by the Appeal Committee; in case of conflict of authority, the Arbitration Committee takes precedence. However, this does not preclude that in the longer term, the community considers the creation of a method to appeal
100:
could be granted to the committee if desired by the community, for example on protections. A recusal system similar to that of ArbCom would be used. Decisions would be taken with a majority of active non-recused members. The precise procedures have not yet been established.
116:
Requests for information or joint discussions between the
Arbitration Committee and Appeal Committee would probably be frequent, thus a system for easy and exclusive communication between the two committees through mailing lists should be established.
124:, the Appeal Committee could similarly request information or verifications to the audit Committee, thus a similar system for easy and exclusive communication between the committees should be established.
140:. It is proposed to establish a policy concerned with the appeal process on Knowledge, in particular with the appeal of user sanctions but not only, and that it covers the Appeal Committee policy.
110:
ArbCom decisions involving the Appeal
Committee, but only as a part of a process. If desired by the community, the Appeal Committee could also offer advisory recommendations on an ArbCom decision.
67:
is a proposed committee of functionaries empowered to appeal sanctions imposed by administrators or by the community. The transfer of this responsibility from the
113:
If underserved, it is possible that arbitrators be temporarily appointed to the Appeal
Committee in rotation, until all seats are taken.
76:. As a policy for this committee and to clarify the appeal process on Knowledge, it is also proposed that an Appeal Policy be created.
73:
49:
152:
133:
92:
step has already been attempted, for example, by restoring the page and (re-)initializing a deletion discussion (see
137:
97:
53:
120:
In the past, the Ban appeals subcommittee has requested verifications of checkuser findings to the
93:
44:
68:
121:
85:
146:
89:
72:
users elected by the community for two-year terms, and meeting the requirements for
17:
38:
This proposal has become dormant through lack of discussion by the community.
48:
interest. If you want to revive discussion on this subject, try using the
132:
As of now, methods to appeal sanctions are documented in the policy
105:
Relations with the
Arbitration Committee and the Audit Committee
26:
84:
Currently, the
Arbitration Committee, with its dedicated
8:
138:Knowledge:Banning policy#Appeals process
7:
25:
30:
1:
52:or start a discussion at the
134:Knowledge:Appealing a block
169:
86:ban appeals subcommittee
74:access to nonpublic data
45:retained for historical
98:appellate jurisdiction
96:on this). Additional
69:Arbitration Committee
94:a recent discussion
42:It is inactive but
153:Knowledge archives
122:Audit Subcommittee
61:
60:
16:(Redirected from
160:
65:Appeal Committee
34:
33:
27:
21:
18:Knowledge:AppCom
168:
167:
163:
162:
161:
159:
158:
157:
143:
142:
130:
107:
90:deletion review
82:
57:
31:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
166:
164:
156:
155:
145:
144:
129:
126:
106:
103:
81:
78:
59:
58:
41:
40:
35:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
165:
154:
151:
150:
148:
141:
139:
135:
128:Appeal policy
127:
125:
123:
118:
114:
111:
104:
102:
99:
95:
91:
87:
79:
77:
75:
70:
66:
55:
51:
47:
46:
39:
36:
29:
28:
19:
131:
119:
115:
112:
108:
83:
64:
62:
54:village pump
43:
37:
50:talk page
147:Category
136:and
80:Role
63:The
149::
56:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.