Template:CharterVote2/40/Discussion: Difference between revisions
imported>Russell D. Jones (Agree) |
imported>D. Matt Innis (HOLD ON) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
#in <u>some</u> cases, <u>either at the discretion of the appellant council or at the request of a grievant</u>, part of a public dispute resolution process may be <s>restricted to a smaller audience</s> <u>permanently removed from the Citizendium</u>. Such an exception shall require public justification by the Ombudsman. | #in <u>some</u> cases, <u>either at the discretion of the appellant council or at the request of a grievant</u>, part of a public dispute resolution process may be <s>restricted to a smaller audience</s> <u>permanently removed from the Citizendium</u>. Such an exception shall require public justification by the Ombudsman. | ||
Agree (I added a comma at the end of grievant) [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 21:23, 17 July 2010 (UTC) | <s>Agree (I added a comma at the end of grievant) [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 21:23, 17 July 2010 (UTC)</s> | ||
Agree. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 01:57, 18 July 2010 (UTC) | Agree. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 01:57, 18 July 2010 (UTC) | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
Agree. [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] 05:34, 18 July 2010 (UTC) | Agree. [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] 05:34, 18 July 2010 (UTC) | ||
Wait a minute. What if the appellant requests us to permanently remove something that makes him/her look bad, but is essential to the case against them. If we permanently delete it, we permanently delete any defense of our actions in the real world, opening us up to an indefensible lawsuit. Am I being paranoid? haha. Maybe we should just remove it to another more private spot (such as the constable wiki). Perhaps we should say: | |||
*in some cases, either at the discretion of the appellant council or at the request of a grievant, part of a public dispute resolution process may be <s>permanently removed from the Citizendium</s> <u>expunged from public view</u>. Such an exception shall require public justification by the Ombudsman. | |||
I'm not totally happy with the language, yet. Help? [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 12:37, 18 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 06:37, 18 July 2010
< RETURN TO THE MAIN PAGE
I'm not so conversant with the workings of the Mediawiki software to know this, but is it possible to completely remove parts of articles from the database such that they are not even accessible by the history? The Ombudsman could re-write a page and then delete the original (but the original still remains somewhere in the Db and can be recovered). Given that we are operating under our real names, we should have the right to have dispute resolutions resolved privately and the record expunged, no? Russell D. Jones 14:36, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Normally, dispute resolutions should be heard in public. However,
- Participants may request that disputes be heard privately.
- Privately heard disputes forfeit their right to appeal on technical grounds.
- in some cases, either at the discretion of the appellant council or at the request of a grievant, part of a public dispute resolution process may be
restricted to a smaller audiencepermanently removed from the Citizendium. Such an exception shall require public justification by the Ombudsman.
Agree (I added a comma at the end of grievant) D. Matt Innis 21:23, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Agree. Howard C. Berkowitz 01:57, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Agree. Joe Quick 05:05, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Agree. Russell D. Jones 05:34, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Wait a minute. What if the appellant requests us to permanently remove something that makes him/her look bad, but is essential to the case against them. If we permanently delete it, we permanently delete any defense of our actions in the real world, opening us up to an indefensible lawsuit. Am I being paranoid? haha. Maybe we should just remove it to another more private spot (such as the constable wiki). Perhaps we should say:
- in some cases, either at the discretion of the appellant council or at the request of a grievant, part of a public dispute resolution process may be
permanently removed from the Citizendiumexpunged from public view. Such an exception shall require public justification by the Ombudsman.
I'm not totally happy with the language, yet. Help? D. Matt Innis 12:37, 18 July 2010 (UTC)