Bộ Quy tắc Ứng xử Chung/Ủy ban Điều phối/Hiến chương

Bộ Quy tắc Ứng xử Chung

• Chính sách
• Nguyên tắc thực thi sửa đổi
• Ủy ban Điều phối (U4C) điều lệ
• Tổng quan dự án
• Câu hỏi thường gặp
• Mô đun đào tạo

Ủy ban Điều phối Bộ Quy tắc Ứng xử Chung (U4C), đại diện cho cộng đồng toàn cầu, là một cơ quan thực thi có nhiệm vụ đảm bảo việc thực thi BQTUXC một cách công bằng và nhất quán.

Đây là một cơ quan ngang cấp với các cơ quan ra quyết định cấp cao khác, chẳng hạn như Ủy ban Trọng tài TTGBMTTCNKCK (NDA) và Tiếp viên. U4C xác định liệu một nhóm hoặc cộng đồng Wikimedia có thất bại mang tính hệ thống trong việc thực thi Bộ Quy tắc Ứng xử Chung hay không. Ủy ban cũng đảm bảo chất lượng cho các tài liệu đào tạo liên quan đến Bộ Quy tắc Ứng xử Chung và giám sát quá trình đánh giá thường niên của cộng đồng đối với Bộ Quy tắc Ứng xử Chung và Hướng dẫn Thực thi.

Hiến chương này nêu chi tiết phạm vi và mục đích của U4C, quy trình lựa chọn, vai trò thành viên, các thủ tục cơ bản, cũng như các chính sách và tiền lệ.

1. Mục đích và Phạm vi

1.1. Chức năng

Phạm vi của U4C được bao gồm ở:

• Giám sát các báo cáo về vi phạm Bộ Quy tắc Ứng xử Chung. U4C có thể tiến hành điều tra bổ sung và thực hiện các biện pháp khi phù hợp.
• Theo dõi tình trạng thực thi Bộ Quy tắc Ứng xử Chung trên tất cả không gian trực tuyến và ngoại tuyến của Wikimedia, theo quyết định phê chuẩn của Hội đồng Quản trị Wikimedia Foundation vào năm 2020.
• Đề xuất các thay đổi phù hợp đối với Bộ Quy tắc Ứng xử Chung và Nguyên tắc Thực thi để Quỹ Wikimedia và cộng đồng xem xét trong quá trình đánh giá thường niên.
  • U4C không thể tự mình thay đổi bất kỳ tài liệu nào trong hai tài liệu này.
• Hỗ trợ Quỹ Wikimedia và các bên liên quan khác trong việc xử lý các trường hợp thuộc thẩm quyền của họ khi được yêu cầu.

1.2. Trách nhiệm

U4C có những trách nhiệm sau đây:

• Xử lý khiếu nại và kháng nghị trong các trường hợp được quy định trong Nguyên tắc Thực thi, bao gồm nhưng không giới hạn ở:
  • Thiếu khả năng tự quản lý ở cấp địa phương để thực thi BQTUXC;
  • Khi các quyết định nhất quán ở cấp địa phương nhưng mâu thuẫn với BQTUXC;
  • Việc các nhóm và cơ chế tự quản lý ở địa phương từ chối thực thi BQTUXC;
  • Thiếu nguồn lực hoặc thiếu ý chí để giải quyết các vấn đề cản trở việc thực thi BQTUXC một cách hiệu quả thông qua các quy trình tự quản lý cấp địa phương;
• Thực hiện bất kỳ cuộc điều tra nào cần thiết để giải quyết các khiếu nại và kháng nghị;
• Cung cấp tài nguyên cho các cộng đồng về các thực tiễn tốt nhất liên quan đến BQTUXC, bao gồm tài liệu cho các khóa đào tạo bắt buộc, đảm bảo chất lượng cho các tài nguyên đào tạo do thành viên phong trào và tổ chức tạo ra (vượt ngoài tài liệu đào tạo cơ bản về BQTUXC do U4C trực tiếp giám sát), cùng các tài nguyên khác khi cần thiết;
• Đưa ra diễn giải cuối cùng về BQTUXC và Hướng dẫn Thực thi BQTUXC khi cần thiết, phối hợp với các thành viên cộng đồng và các cơ chế thực thi;
• Đánh giá hiệu quả trong việc thực thi BQTUXC và đưa ra những khuyến nghị để cải thiện.

Ngoài những điều trên:

• U4C sẽ không tiếp nhận các trường hợp không chủ yếu liên quan đến vi phạm BQTUXTC hoặc việc thực thi BQTUXC.
• U4C có thể ủy quyền đưa ra quyết định cuối cùng, trừ các trường hợp liên quan đến vấn đề hệ thống nghiêm trọng. Trách nhiệm của U4C được giải thích trong bối cảnh các cơ chế thực thi khác tại mục 3.1.2 của Nguyên tắc Thực thi Bộ Quy tắc Ứng xử Chung.

1.3. Thành viên

U4C sẽ bao gồm 16 thành viên do cộng đồng bầu chọn và tối đa hai thành viên không qua bầu chọn do Quỹ Wikimedia bổ nhiệm. Mỗi thành viên qua bầu chọn sẽ phục vụ nhiệm kỳ hai năm, ngoại trừ cuộc bầu cử đầu tiên (xem mục 3.2).

Quỹ Wikimedia có thể bổ nhiệm tối đa hai thành viên không qua bầu chọn và có thể chọn thêm nhân viên hỗ trợ theo yêu cầu của U4C.

1.4. Xung đột lợi ích

Các thành viên được bầu trong U4C không bắt buộc phải từ chức khỏi các vị trí khác (ví dụ: bảo quản viên địa phương, thành viên Ủy ban Trọng tài) nhưng không được làm nhân viên hoặc nhà thầu của Quỹ Wikimedia hay các tổ chức trực thuộc Quỹ, cũng như không được là thành viên Hội đồng Quản trị Quỹ Wikimedia.

2. Bầu cử và Nhiệm kỳ

2.1. Điều kiện thành viên

Mỗi thành viên và ứng cử viên phải:

• Tuân thủ Bộ Quy tắc Ứng xử Chung.
• Ít nhất 18 tuổi và ký thỏa thuận giữ bí mật thông tin không công khai (NDA) với Quỹ Wikimedia khi họ được bầu.
• Không bị cấm hoặc cấm chỉ trên bất kỳ dự án Wikimedia nào trong vòng một năm. Các ứng cử viên bị cấm có thể kháng nghị lên Ủy ban Bầu cử, tại đây cơ quan này có thể xem xét cho một ngoại lệ.
• Công khai xác định wiki chính và quốc gia gốc của họ.
• Đáp ứng các điều kiện khác được xác định trong quá trình bầu cử.
• Là thành viên đã đăng ký của ít nhất một dự án Wiki trong tối thiểu 365 ngày và có ít nhất 500 sửa đổi.

Ủy ban bầu cử sẽ có thẩm quyền cuối cùng để quyết định liệu các ứng cử viên có đáp ứng các yêu cầu đủ điều kiện hay không.

2.2. Phân bổ về ghế

2.2.1. Phân bổ theo khu vực

Để đảm bảo U4C đại diện cho sự đa dạng của phong trào Wikimedia, tám đại diện từ tám khu vực khác nhau sẽ được bầu theo phân bổ khu vực. Theo cách tiếp cận khu vực của Quỹ Wikimedia, phân bổ khu vực sẽ như sau:

• Bắc Mỹ (Hoa Kỳ và Canada)
• Bắc và Tây Âu
• Mỹ Latinh và Caribê
• Trung và Đông Âu (CEE)
• Châu Phi Hạ Sahara
• Trung Đông và Bắc Phi
• Đông, Đông Nam Á và Thái Bình Dương (ESEAP)
• Nam Á

2.2.2. Phân bổ theo cộng đồng lớn

Tám đại diện từ toàn các cộng đồng lớn sẽ được bầu.

2.3. Nhiệm kỳ

Mỗi nhiệm kỳ của U4C sẽ diễn ra trong hai năm, ngoại trừ cuộc bầu cử đầu tiên.

Đối với cuộc bầu cử đầu tiên, ứng cử viên theo khu vực sẽ phục vụ nhiệm kỳ hai năm và là một năm đối với ứng cử viên tới từ cộng đồng lớn.

2.4. Bầu cử

Cuộc bầu cử hằng năm để bầu chọn các thành viên của U4C sẽ do U4C giám sát và được Ủy ban Bầu cử phối hợp tổ chức. Đối với cuộc bầu cử đầu tiên, Ủy ban Xây dựng U4C (U4CBC) sẽ thay mặt U4C thực hiện nhiệm vụ này.

Các ứng viên sẽ phải đáp ứng các yêu cầu được nêu trong mục 2.1.

Cuộc bầu cử đầu tiên của U4C sẽ được tổ chức sớm nhất có thể sau khi quá trình phê chuẩn Hiến chương U4C hoàn tất thành công.

Quy trình bầu cử tuân theo thời gian sau đây:

• Xác định ngày bầu cử, thời gian diễn ra và số lượng ghế theo khu vực cũng như ghế chung ít nhất một tháng trước khi bầu cử bắt đầu.
• Mở đầu quy trình bầu cử bởi Ủy ban Bầu cử
• Giai đoạn đề cử – Thời gian tiếp nhận ứng cử viên/đề cử
• Thời gian xác minh của các ứng viên
• Giai đoạn Hỏi và Trả lời – Ứng cử viên trả lời các câu hỏi từ cộng đồng
• Giai đoạn bỏ phiếu – Các thành viên đủ điều kiện có thể tham gia bỏ phiếu cho ứng cử viên

2.5. Voting Process

• Voting is conducted by secret ballot, with voters leaving support, oppose and neutral votes for each candidate.
• Voters are able to vote for candidates from all regions.
• Neutral votes will not count.
• Voter eligibility will be decided by the Elections Committee.
• The candidate must have 60% or higher of votes as calculated by support/(support + oppose). After this qualification:
  • For each candidate the number of opposes will be subtracted from the number of supporters. The candidates with the highest difference will be elected to each seat.
  • If two candidates have the same difference then the percentage calculated by support/(support + oppose) will be used as a tiebreaker.

After the first session of the U4C, the U4CBC will be dissolved and the U4C will begin work as soon as possible.

2.6. Vacancies

If there is an empty seat, whether because of resignations, removals, or no candidate was chosen for a regional seat in an election, the U4C may leave the seat empty and temporarily fill it during the next election, or the U4C may call a special election. An additional option in the case of resignation or removal is that the U4C may appoint a member who ran within the most recent election and received at least 60% support.

Members who fill a vacant seat will serve out the remainder of the term of the seat they are filling.

3. Internal Procedures

The U4C may create or modify their internal procedures as long as it is within their scope. There should be fairness and impartiality among members in the group's processes. Whenever appropriate, the U4C should invite community feedback on intended changes prior to implementing them.

3.1. Internal Policy and Precedent

The U4C does not create new policy and may not amend or change the UCoC and its Enforcement Guidelines. The U4C instead applies and enforces the UCoC as defined by its scope.

Previous decisions may be taken into account only to the extent that they remain relevant in the current context, as community policies, guidelines and norms evolve over time.

The U4C may, however, suggest changes to the UCoC and Enforcement Guidelines for the Wikimedia Foundation and the community to consider as part of the annual review process organized by the U4C.

3.2. Conduct of U4C members

U4C members should:

• Actively engage in the U4C work, and inform the U4C at the start of any absence from U4C participation.
• Respond in a timely and suitable manner to concerns about their conduct.
• Maintain the confidentiality of private information shared with the U4C, including private correspondence and non-public personal information.
• Maintain collegial relations with their fellow U4C members and work to productively resolve interpersonal conflicts.
• Uphold the idea that no U4C member is more or less powerful than any other member.
• Strive to act in a transparent manner, providing explanations for their decisions whenever possible while maintaining appropriate confidentiality.
• Be knowledgeable about global policies, including the Universal Code of Conduct, and should work to gain knowledge of local policies and culture for any work the U4C handles.

Any U4C member who repeatedly or grossly violates the expectations outlined above may be suspended or removed by public committee resolution. This public committee resolution must be supported by two-thirds of all U4C members, excluding the following from the voting process:

• The U4C member facing suspension or removal, and;
• Any U4C member who does not respond within 30 days to any attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of written communication.

3.3. Transparency and Confidentiality

Complaints accepted shall be reported publicly on-wiki with at least minimal information.

Work decided shall be reported publicly on-wiki, stating account names, projects, dates and a rudimentary case description. If any information is unsuitable for public reports due to privacy or legal reasons, reports shall anonymize it by broadening details or even omit the respective information as appropriate.

If a U4C member breaches confidentiality agreements, it is important to address the issue through appropriate internal disciplinary actions, if necessary. Breaches of the Privacy Policy, the Access to nonpublic personal data policy, the CheckUser policy and the Oversight policy are also investigated by the Ombuds Commission. The Committee should conduct an investigation to determine whether the breach was an error or intentional. The committee may recommend to the Wikimedia Foundation to revoke a confidentiality agreement if an investigation determines this is warranted.

3.4. Quorum

The U4C can seat with any number of members, but no decision or vote can be taken by the Committee unless the quorum of 50% (8 members) of the voting members (16 members) is attained. When there is no quorum, the U4C will continue to work on matters where no vote is needed and call a special election if needed.

3.5. Subcommittees

The U4C Building Committee suggests that at least two subcommittees are created within the U4C at the time of formation. One subcommittee for the prevention, training and reports pertaining to the U4C work and the second subcommittee for the review and handling of cases.

3.6. Structured Support

Some work may necessitate certain structured support. The U4C may form subcommittees or designate members for particular tasks or roles as appropriate to address the work of the U4C.

The Wikimedia Foundation will provide tools for the Committee to help it accomplish its work (e.g. secure communication tools, private wiki, etc). The Foundation may appoint additional support staff as requested by the U4C.

3.7. Tools

The Committee can take all measures it deems appropriate and proportionate to adhere to its mandate and address systemic failures to adequately enforce the UCoC in line with the enforcement guideline and this policy. This includes creating or requesting user rights for committee members or its delegates for administration (local/global Wiki and MediaWiki tools), supporting tools like mailing lists and private wiki, and other tools like the Private Incident Reporting System to support operations of the U4C, to be created and administered by the Wikimedia Foundation and the stewards during the term of U4C members.

Any rights granted for U4C committee purposes must be used only for U4C actions, investigations and emergency cases unless they have other administrative rights granted from local or global processes.

3.8. Recusal

A U4C member may recuse themselves from any work, or from any aspect of the work, with or without explanation, and it’s required when a conflict of interest arises. This situation may result in a member of the U4C participating in the discussions about the work, but not the voting process.

Any U4C member participating in their U4C member capacity regarding work from a project or affiliate they participate in has the responsibility of the decision to recuse themselves. Members of the U4C will not participate in the work if they have been directly involved with the work as a result of their other positions or other activities. This decision is still subject to a vote by the whole membership of the U4C. Any U4C member may choose to withdraw from the recusal vote, but still participate in discussions of recusals from the work.

Typically, a conflict of interest regarding U4C work includes personal involvement in the substance of the dispute or significant personal involvement with one of the parties involved in the work. Previous interactions with the parties as routine editor, administrator or U4C interactions are not usually grounds for recusal.

3.8.1. Process and procedures regarding requesting member recusal

If a person believes a U4C member should recuse themselves from certain work of the U4C, the person has to send their request to the U4C asking for the person to recuse themselves and identify the work and state their rationale. A member of the U4C may comply with the request to recuse themselves or a vote of the membership of the U4C will happen, excluding the affected member or members.

The U4C should reply to the request before starting to vote on the work. Requests for recusal after the work has entered the voting stage will not be granted, except in extraordinary circumstances.

3.9. Relationships

The U4C may issue formal or informal advice and interpretation of the UCoC. When possible, the U4C should respond to requests from other high level decision-making bodies, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees, or the Wikimedia Foundation for advice or interpretation. Other groups or individuals may also request advice and interpretation from the U4C. Where appropriate, the U4C should publicly document their formal advice and interpretation.

3.9.1. Relationship with other movement government structures

According to the UCoC Enforcement Guidelines, depending on the situation, the U4C can act as a high level decision-making body about the UCoC and as a peer group to other high level decision making bodies. The Committee's role is to provide resources for communities on UCoC best practices and act as the final recourse in situations where there are systemic issues by local groups to enforce the UCoC on their own.

For cases involving Affiliate staff, the U4C should handle the case jointly with the Affiliate and/or AffCom. The U4C may take actions regarding staff in Wikimedia movement spaces and may recommend other action to the Affiliate.

Movement government structures may also refer UCoC enforcement cases or appeals, even those which would not normally be in the scope of the U4C, to the U4C. The U4C may decide whether or not to hear those cases or appeals according to its typical procedures.

Requests for advice or interpretation or case referrals should generally be made on Meta-wiki, except when not appropriate for privacy reasons. For situations involving privacy, use of the dedicated email address for the U4C is expected.

4. Tasks

4.1. UCoC and Enforcement Training Resources

The U4C will oversee the creation and maintenance of training resources, as well as coordinating with the Wikimedia Foundation on translation of such training resources.

Three basic training modules shall cover as mandated in the enforcement guidelines will include:

• Orientation
• Identification and reporting
• Complex cases and appeals

These modules will be publicly accessible, on platforms such as on learn.wiki, and must be translated in cooperation with the Wikimedia Foundation into as many languages as possible. The list or number of languages will be determined by the U4C.

Alongside providing training modules, the U4C can explore and support other ways of training, collaborating with various community stakeholders such as but not limited to the Wikimedia Foundation and affiliates.

The U4C can also share the best practices of UCoC violations and related matters and offer quality assurance and certification of UCoC training resources created by other movement stakeholders upon request.

Just like the UCoC itself defines minimums, and invites and encourages communities to build upon those minimum standards for behavior, movement stakeholders are welcome to build upon and improve the basic training resources.

4.2. Jurisdiction, proceedings, adjudication, appeals

4.2.1. Jurisdiction

The U4C has jurisdiction within all Wikimedia-related online and offline spaces within the scope of its mandate as defined by the Enforcement Guidelines. The U4C will not take cases that do not primarily involve violations of the UCoC, or its enforcement. The U4C may delegate its final decision-making authority except in instances of systemic failures.

The U4C has no jurisdiction, except as noted in the relationship sections above, over: (i) official actions of the Wikimedia Foundation or its staff; (ii) Wikimedia affiliate employment relations issues governed by laws and regulations of the affiliate’s jurisdiction.

Except in instances of systemic failures, the U4C will not have jurisdiction when a NDA-signed, high-level decision-making body exists (Arbitration Committees, Affiliations Committee, Global Council, Elections Committee, Technical Code of Conduct committee, stewards), warranting effective self-governance. The U4C should also respect the movement principle of decentralization, understanding that the UCoC should be enforced at the most relevant local level possible.

The U4C retains jurisdiction over all matters heard by it, including associated enforcement processes, and may, at its sole discretion, revisit any proceeding at any time unless the issue is handed over to the Wikimedia Foundation in its capacity as platform provider due to legal issues.

4.2.1.1. Systemic failures

Issues related to systemic failure can be raised by anyone and the U4C may choose to open an investigation with at least majority support. If the Foundation or a high-level decision making body requests an investigation into a systemic failure, the U4C will open an investigation. A good faith disagreement over how to interpret the UCoC is not enough to determine that a high-level decision making body has systematically failed to enforce the code.

In line with the community-approved enforcement guidelines, the U4C can take all measures it deems appropriate and proportionate to address systemic failures (e.g. project-capture) to adequately enforce the UCoC. The U4C may rely on reports by the Wikimedia Foundation and other movement groups or may request its own external report when making its decision. Sanctions for systemic failure to enforce the UCoC includes the full range of measures, up to and including the closure of wikis. A report should be published for the global community’s consideration after the adjudication.

4.2.2. Proceedings

4.2.2.1. Requesting adjudication review

Requests for adjudication review must be presented in the manner designated by the U4C. The U4C may accept or decline any matter at its sole discretion; it will take into account, but will not be bound by the views of the parties to the request and other informed users.

4.2.2.2. Forms of proceeding

• Standard proceedings: By default, hearings are public and follow the procedures published on the relevant U4C pages. Proceedings can be private if the U4C takes the view that a public proceeding might cause disproportionate harm – typically where significant privacy, harassment, or legal issues are involved – to proceeding participants, third parties, or could adversely affect the Wikimedia Foundation’s legal, technical, and public policy-related platform provider obligations. The parties will be notified of the private hearing and be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to what is said about them before a decision is made.
• Expedited proceeding: Where the facts of a matter are substantially undisputed, the U4C may resolve the dispute by a vote without a standard proceeding.

4.2.2.3. Participation

A member whose term expires while a case is pending may remain active on that case until its conclusion. Newly appointed members may become active on any matter before the U4C with immediate effect from the date of their appointment.

Statements may be added to case pages by any informed and interested user. The U4C may further set rules as needed for the submission of statements. Users may respond to statements about themselves and the U4C will make a good faith effort to contact any user who is the subject of a case; failure to do so may result in decisions being made without their participation. All editors are required to act according to the UCoC on U4C case pages, and may face sanctions if they fail to do so.

4.2.2.4. Admissibility of evidence

In all proceedings, admissible evidence includes:

1. All edits and log entries, including deleted or otherwise hidden edits and log entries from online projects, platforms, and services within the U4C’s scope;
2. Testimony and evidence from offline incidents as deemed appropriate by the U4C.

Evidence is admissible in all languages supported by Wikimedia Foundation platforms and services. If the U4C requires additional resources processing material received, it can coordinate with the Wikimedia Foundation as other community self-governance committees collaborating with the platform provider do. Evidence based on private communications (including, but not limited to, other websites, forums, chat rooms, IRC logs, email correspondence) is admissible only by prior consent of the U4C.

Evidence may be submitted privately, but the U4C normally expects evidence to be posted publicly in all public proceedings unless there are compelling reasons not to do so, or it has been determined the proceeding will be private. The U4C will decide whether to admit each submission of private evidence on its own merits and, if admitted, the evidence will be considered at a private hearing.

4.2.2.5. Temporary injunctions

At any time between the request for a case being made and the closure of the case, the U4C may issue temporary injunctions, restricting the conduct of the parties, or users generally, for the duration of the case.

4.2.3. Adjudication

4.2.3.1. Format of decisions

Decisions are written in clear, concise standard English and the primary language(s) relevant to the case at hand; usually including: (i) an outline of the salient principles, (ii) findings of fact, (iii) setting out remedies and rulings, and (iv) specifying any enforcement arrangements. Where the meaning of any provision is unclear to any U4C member, the parties, or other interested editors, it may be clarified upon request.

4.2.4. Appeals

4.2.4.1. Admissibility of appeals

Appeals by blocked, banned, or similarly restricted individual users are usually conducted by email.

4.2.4.2. Appeal of decisions

Any party to the case may ask the U4C to reconsider or amend a ruling, which the U4C may accept or decline at its discretion. The U4C may require a minimum time to have elapsed since the enactment of the ruling, or since any prior request for reconsideration, before reviewing it.

4.3. UCoC and Enforcement Guidelines- Review and Changes

4.3.1. UCoC monitoring

The U4C shall closely monitor the Foundation safety perception surveys, its own caseload trends, and feedback from community self-governance processes to identify challenges to the effective self-governance of communities to enforce the UCoC. Concerns identified shall be publicly documented on the U4C’s noticeboard, addressed as merited, or tabled during the annual UCoC & EG review.

Preceding the annual review, the U4C will complete the following:

• Contact functionaries in our global community, including:
  • Stewards
  • ArbCom members
  • Checkusers
  • Oversighters
  • Administrators
  • Communities
• Provide reports of any observations requiring the U4C to look into UCoC or EG-related challenges in communities. The U4C is obligated to discuss these reports for inclusion in their proposal.
• Open a comment page on Meta-wiki available for everyone. It contains a section for any community member to report matters about how the U4C, the EG and the UCoC work as enforced. The comment page is linked in U4C communications about the annual review. The U4C shall look into comments and questions placed on that page, but is not obligated to follow-up in depth.
• The above mentioned Meta-wiki comment page contains a second dedicated section allowing community members to share ideas for improvement and amendments. This is helpful to collect ideas from individuals and aims to be open to all voices in the community. U4C is required to read and decide if they want to adopt these ideas when drafting a proposal during the annual process.
• The U4C should actively search and identify any new or unusual trends of unacceptable behaviors occurring in the movement. They may observe the trends, the comments of the community, and consider academic research.

4.3.2. Changes to the Charter, the Enforcement Guidelines or the UCoC

Changes to the Charter, the Enforcement Guidelines or the UCoC require community approval. The U4C will organize at its sole discretion the annual review of the UCoC, the Enforcement Guidelines and the Charter. It comprises at least:

• A feedback evaluation phase
  • Call for comment globally
  • An evaluation of comments and accumulated community sentiment from all channels
  • A knowledge from the actual state of research about our movement and Internet in general
• A drafting phase
  • Inclusion of evaluated functionaries and community comments, internal notes from the noticeboard and knowledge from the actual state of research about our movement and Internet in general.
  • During the drafting phase there are at least three open community conversations, for timezone coverage.
  • The changed draft is published regularly during the drafting phase, depending on the U4C’s workflow either after every session or weekly.
  • The final draft is reviewed by the Wikimedia Foundations Legal Department on-wiki.
• A voting phase
  • Votes will be cast by community members with > 60% or > 66% approval
  • The translation of the final draft preceding the vote and running and promoting the poll according to the specifications of the U4C is ensured by the Wikimedia Foundation.
  • The ballot must allow voters to vote separately on individual substantive sections.

5. Glossary

Regional Distribution group: The Regional Distribution group is the group of Community elected representatives of the U4C coming from each of the 8 Wikimedia determined regions (Central and East Europe (CEE); Latin America and Caribbean; Middle East and North Africa; North America (USA and Canada); South Asia; East, Southeast Asia and Pacific (ESEAP); Sub-Saharan Africa; Western Europe).

Community at Large group: The Community at Large group is the group of the U4C Community elected representatives being active on any Wikimedia project. However no more than two members can be elected from the same home wiki, this number including the members elected In the Regional part distribution group as well.