User:Sakaratte/Disputes

In any community, be it online or in life, disputes will occur between the its members. For a community to remain healthy these disputes need to be worked through and a resolution reached, even if the solution is to agree to disagree or leave each other be whilst remaining civil.

Regardless of the method of resolving the dispute, empathy and good faith need to be given by all parties involved. If any party is unable or refuses to engage or reach an agreement in this manner, a third party (any uninvolved user) can review the situation or work as a mediator if all parties are open to talking. Mediation should always be taken over an independent review in the first instance, it should be recognised that this isn't always feasible or wanted and should not be pushed.

What happens if the users cannot resolve the issue
If this is purely an interpersonal issue that cannot be resolved between the users or the users with mediation (where appropriate, no-one should be pushed to solve personal spats) nothing more should be done other than to make it clear that those users they need to remain civil otherwise community rules around behaviour will have to be applied. In cases where there is a community element, such as misuse or questionable use of tools, or differing interpretations of guidelines, these do still need to be looked into so learnings and improvements to policies and guidelines can be made. In the case of small issues such as how wording on an article guideline leaves interpretation too broad, this should be dealt with by the community at large. For larger issues such as misuse of tools, using a small number of individuals to review the issue and make recommendations for the community to decide on the solution can provide a better solution. This review team will be called arbitrators for the purposes of this discussion.

Setting up an Arbitration Team
Arbitration is a method of resolving a dispute for any reason when consensus cannot be reached between multiple users, and is especially beneficial where tools are used or where a rights holder (who although not leaders are often seen as such) is involved. Only one arbiter is necessary, but 3 or 5 is recommended and should be the first option rather than a single individual. Arbiters should be individuals that all parties are comfortable with reviewing the issue.

The arbitrators do not need to be a part of the community themselves; it would in fact be encouraged where possible to have a mix of within and without the community to provide fresh insight to the rules and policies and their interpretation.

If parties cannot agree to an arbitration either:
 * Arguments from each party on their stance must be provided direct to the community.
 * Blocks Only - Fandom is contacted to review
 * Disagreeing parties choose to leave the matter as is. If the matter relates to policy and guidelines and not a specific user they may still discuss without the user's involvement. Matters relating to a user who does not pursue a change must be left as is until they wish for them to be reviewed.

Reviewing the Issue
Once arbiters have been appointed, they should review the arguments of the individuals involved, any relevant policies and any evidence available. If evidence cannot be provided because it is sensitive, then arbitration is not suitable and advice should be sought by Fandom on what to do. Acting on the findings (whether the user was involved or not in the case of policy and guidelines) should be decided by the community. If there is an element of tools misuse where good faith cannot be given a separate discussion as to if the user should retain rights should also be had. Fandom can be asked to oversee this discussion if necessary in the case of blocks and tools misuse and remove those if the rights holder is either a bureaucrat or the bureaucrat refused to remove the rights if the community feels those rights should not be retained.

If the Issue is Still Unresolved
In the majority of cases where the issue still feels unresolved by any party, that party must accept the general feeling of the community and either work with the community agreement or decide if they wish to remain.

Blocks
In the case of any blocks that fall outside of community policy, they should use Special:Contact to ask Fandom to review the block. This is an option throughout and can be used in the first instance as Fandom policy cannot be replaced by local policy. Fandom will examine the block against the community guidelines and policies and make a final decision that cannot be overturned by the community. Any attempt by users within the community to overturn a Fandom decision unilaterally (i.e. resetting the block) may find their rights are also removed by Fandom as part of their Terms of Service.