Revisions to the Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) Enforcement Guidelines

,

Hello all,

We’d like to provide an update on the work on the Enforcement Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct. After the conclusion of the community vote on the guidelines in March, the Community Affairs committee (CAC) of the Board asked that several areas of the guidelines be reviewed for improvements before the Board does its final review. These areas were identified based on community discussions and comments provided during the vote. The CAC also requested review of the controversial Note in 3.1 of the UCoC itself.

Once more, a big thank you to all who voted, especially to all who left constructive feedback and comments! The project team is working with the Board to establish a timeline for this work, and will communicate this next month.

Members of the two prior UCoC Drafting Committees have generously offered their time to help shape improvements to the Guidelines. You can read more about them and their work here, as well as read summaries of their weekly meetings in 2022.

Wikimedians have provided many valuable comments together with the vote and in other conversations. Given the size and diversity of the Wikimedia community, there are even more voices out there who can give ideas on how to improve the enforcement guidelines and add even more valuable ideas to the process. To help the Revisions committee identify improvements, input on several questions for the committee’s review is requested. Visit the Meta-wiki pages (Enforcement Guidelines revision discussions, Policy text revision discussions) to get your ideas to the Committee - it is very important that viewpoints are heard from different communities before the Committee begins drafting revision proposals.

On behalf of the UCoC project team

3 Likes

Informed by the analysis of the comments provided during the vote, the Revisions Committee is asking the community to give feedback on the three key groups of questions:

  1. On (mandatory) training in the UCoC and its Guidelines;
  2. On balancing privacy protection and due process;
  3. On the requirement that certain groups of users affirm they will acknowledge and adhere to the Universal Code of Conduct.
3 Likes

شكرا على طرح التحديثات، تمنيت أن يٌفتح نقاش منفرد لكل تعديل لفهم أكثر ومشاركة فعالة. ليمكننا بإبداء أرائنا في نقطة محددة بدل قراءة كل النصوص الموجودة سلفا في الميتا.

2 Likes

Hello @Nehaoua.
Thanks for your input. We have separated the three questions into three topics for easier participation and follow-up. They are all still part of the same category.
Looking forward to reading more of your feedback.

2 Likes

Here is a link for the mysterious “controversial Note in 3.1 of the UCoC itself”, the text of which is

Note: The Wikimedia movement does not endorse “race” and “ethnicity” as meaningful distinctions among people. Their inclusion here is to mark that they are prohibited in use against others as the basis for personal attacks.

1 Like

مرحبا عادل، كلي أمل أن يتجاوب مجتمعنا مع هذا الطرح لأنه الآراء مطلوبة، أنوي بدء النقاشات حول هذه الأمور الثلاث كل على حدا، في مجموعة تليغرام والفيسبوك أولاً، أرجو مساعدتي على تحريك النقاش.

3 Likes

مرحبًا، وأنا على استعداد فالموضوع هام تحياتي

1 Like

thanks. which facebook group is that? if possible, I would be glad to join. if it is not feasible for me to join, due to being aimed at a different geographic region or other group, then that’s totally fine. tagging @Mervat_WMF for their input. thanks.

1 Like

Hi all,

I thought I read somewhere that the timeline for this revision process would be posted somewhere but I’ve not seen it.

How would it work?

After this commenting period with a mysterious :alien: deadline, I assume that review committees (I also assume that there will be two committees, one for the UCoC and the other for the guidelines but I’m not sure) will discuss to come up with new drafts.

Do we have opportunities to express our opinions after the new revised drafts come out?

Or once those committees come up with the new revised drafts, they would be the versions for voting without further modifications?

I’m in dark here. :candle:

2 Likes

I am sorry for not replying earlier. I meant a facebook group and a telegram group that gather the Arabic Wikimedians.

1 Like

Movement communications insights/Report/Introduction」中にある「Participants want clear messaging, prioritization and calendaring from the Foundation. 」でも言われていますね。Diffカレンダーもありますが、タイムラインとしての表示が分かりやすい、ということですね?Meta:Wikimedia CH/Cronosをみつけました。

1 Like

Could we have clear criteria for approval of the guidelines? I find it pretty frustrating that a vote was taken and the majority is being ignored to review a few points that are not even central to the functioning of the UCoC. Can we suspend these sections for further review and enforce the UCoC now?

The first reference I find to UCoC is in june of 2019, and I fear any participation in this now 3 year long process of creating a universal code of conduct is pointless, as goalposts can always be shifted later.

2 Likes

Hi Chicocvenancio!

Apologies on our lag in response. I will bring your feedback back to the project team for us to discuss, and we will come back with an answer shortly!

1 Like

Hi all,

The community discussion about the Revised UCoC Enforcement Guidelines is taking place on this Forum thread.

The newest revision comes as the result of the work of the UCoC EG Revisions Committee which collaborated to revise draft guidelines based on input gathered from the community discussion period from May through July 2022, as well as the community vote that concluded in March 2022.

Read more about what has changed in the new version of the Enforcement Guidelines, get informed about the content of conversation hours, unanswered questions, and issues that are still under debate. Feel free to post your questions, comments and suggestions.

1 Like