User:Jkudlick/ArbCom appeal suggestion

Background

The present language outlining the process to appeal an ArbCom decision is:

Any editor may ask the Committee to reconsider or amend a ruling, which the Committee may accept or decline at its discretion. The Committee may require a minimum time to have elapsed since the enactment of the ruling, or since any prior request for reconsideration, before reviewing it. Remedies may be appealed to, and amended by, Jimbo Wales, unless the case involves Jimbo Wales' own actions.

WP:ARBPOL also states that:

Once adopted by the Committee, this policy will undergo formal ratification through a community referendum and will enter into force once it receives majority support, with at least one hundred editors voting in favour of adopting it. Until this policy is ratified, the existing arbitration policy remains in effect.

Amendments to this policy require an identical ratification process. Proposed amendments may be submitted for ratification only after being approved by a majority vote of the Committee, or having been requested by a petition signed by at least one hundred editors in good standing.

On 19 December 2015 an RfC was started at WT:ARBCOM to seek consensus on whether the policy should be changed (closed on 24 January 2016 as no consensus). Many editors, myself included, expressed misgivings during the RfC about allowing one individual to have the authority to overturn, amend, or otherwise modify decisions from the Committee, regardless of the stature of that individual within the community. In fact, it is not certain that Jimbo has ever used that authority, or even replied to a direct appeal. Regardless, some avenue of appeal is still appropriate. During the RfC, I started to outline my proposed procedure, but I felt there were too many details. Therefore, here is my proposal:

Proposed changes to the ArbCom appeal procedure

The previous ArbCom appeal procedure is repealed and replaced with the following:

1. Any editor who has had a decision levied against them may ask the Committee to reconsider or amend that decision within seven (7) days immediately following publication of the decision. An editor who does not file their appeal within that time shall be ineligible to file an appeal until after a period of time prescribed by the Committee.
2. The Committee may accept or decline to hear the appeal at its discretion.
   1. Should the Committee choose to hear the appeal, the appellate decision shall be binding and a subsequent appeal to the administrators shall not be allowed.
   2. Should the Committee decline to hear the appeal, the appellant shall have a period of seven (7) days to file an appeal to the administrators at the appropriate venue.
3. All non-bot active and semi-active administrators and bureaucrats who were uninvolved in the initial case shall have seven (7) days to review any appeal from the time it was filed.
   1. All editors who were members of the Committee during the initial case or any appeal shall be considered involved for all phases of the administrator appeal.
   2. A quorum of 25% of all uninvolved active and semi-active administrators and bureaucrats choosing to hear the appeal shall be required. That quorum shall be determined at the time the appeal is filed.
   3. The appeal shall be denied and the Committee's decision shall stand if the quorum is not met.
4. The administrator appeal process shall be open to the community just as in any Committee case, and the administrators shall have access to all public evidence and statements collected during the initial case and all previous appeals.
   1. The Committee shall appoint at least one Clerk to assist with the appeal.
   2. The appellant shall be the only editor compelled to make a statement.
   3. A 3/4 supermajority of voting administrators and bureaucrats, with a minimum of 150 votes cast, shall be required to overturn, amend, or otherwise modify a Committee ruling.
      1. Only Support and Oppose votes shall be counted toward the total vote; Neutral votes shall be viewed as comments.
      2. If an insufficient number of total votes is cast, then the appeal shall be considered as failed and the Committee decision shall stand.
5. Appeals to WMF staff or directly to Jimbo shall not be allowed and must be disregarded by anyone receiving such an appeal.
6. Nothing in this procedure shall constitute a change in the procedure by which an editor can appeal enforcement actions.