Universal Code of Conduct/Enforcement guidelines/Voter information
A vote to ratify the Enforcement Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) was held from 7 March 2022 until 21 March 2022 23:59:59 (UTC) via SecurePoll. All eligible voters within the Wikimedia Community had an opportunity to support or oppose the adoption of the Enforcement Guidelines, and share why. Ratification of the enforcement guidelines is necessary to establish enforcement pathways and processes for the UCoC. Find more details on voting instructions and voter eligibility below.
The vote is closed and the results have been published. The proposal is approved.
Also see Voting FAQs for information on casting a vote.
If you are eligible to vote:
- Review the Enforcement Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct policy.
- Decide whether to support or oppose the adoption of the Enforcement Guidelines. If opposing the guidelines, write down recommended changes to Guidelines to include with your vote.
- Learn how to record your vote with SecurePoll.
- Go to the SecurePoll Voting page and follow the instructions.
- Remind other community members to vote!
What is being voted on?Edit
The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees supports a community vote on the UCoC enforcement guidelines proposal following the Board’s own ratification of the UCoC. Trustees also recognize the support of such a vote expressed by the joint letter of Arbitration Committees and a survey of volunteer functionaries, affiliate members, and the drafting committee.
One of the key recommendations of the strategic goals for 2030 was the collaborative creation of a UCoC to provide a global baseline of acceptable behavior for the entire movement without tolerance for harassment.
Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement GuidelinesEdit
These guidelines are for the enforcement of the Universal Code of Conduct. The core of the UCoC was previously ratified by the Board of Trustees after consultation with the community, without an explicit poll among the community. It includes preventative, detective, and investigative actions, and other actions taken to address violations of the Universal Code of Conduct. Enforcement would primarily be handled by, but not limited to, designated functionaries across all online and offline Wikimedia projects, events, and related spaces hosted on third party platforms. It would be done in an organized, timely fashion and consistently across the entire Wikimedia movement.
The UCoC Enforcement guidelines consists of two parts:
- Preventive work
- Promoting UCoC awareness, recommending UCoC training, among others.
- Responsive work
- Detailing a process for filing, Processing reported violations, Providing resources for reported violations, Designating enforcement actions for violations, etc..
Why should you vote?Edit
Ratification of the enforcement guidelines is necessary to finalize enforcement pathways, processes and actions for the UCoC. The vote on the Enforcement Guidelines is designed to evaluate the community’s support for the UCoC and gather feedback if voters have reservations about the present proposals. Either way, it is important to make your voice heard through your vote and if voting "no", it is important to articulate which part(s) of the guidelines you have concerns about, and why.
Most importantly, voting will:
- Ensure that your Wikimedia project’s views are represented in the global vote.
How to voteEdit
Please read this section before you go to SecurePoll to learn helpful information to make your voting experience go smoothly.
- A “Comment” box will provide a place for you to leave comments on any concerns you have with the proposed guidelines.
- SecurePoll will then notify you that your vote has been recorded.
- You can re-vote in the election. It overwrites your previous vote. You can do this as many times as you like.
How will the voting outcome be determined?Edit
A threshold of above 50% support of participating users will be needed to move on to Board of Trustees ratification. Currently, the movement does not have a single practice around pass/fail voting processes to follow (some processes use something closer to a supermajority (⅔), while others use a simple majority (50% +1), while others avoid a numerical vote count altogether). For this process, to keep it in line with most referendums in real world jurisdictions, a simple majority vote was chosen.
Voters will be asked which elements need to be changed and why. If the vote produces a majority "no" vote, the UCoC project team will anonymize and publish the reasons given by "no" voters, and prepare a summarized report. Members of the two UCoC Drafting Committees will be invited to form a Revisions Committee; this group will look at improvements to the Guidelines based on concerns raised in the voting process. Similar to this process, the revisions will be published for review, and a second vote will be held.
Will people outside the Wikimedia Foundation be involved in scrutinizing the vote to verify authenticity?Edit
The outcome of the vote will be scrutinized for irregularities by non-staff Wikimedians with experience in movement voting and verification processes. Vote scrutineers are:
Voting eligibility is set by the Wikimedia Board of Trustees. All registered Wikimedia contributors who meet minimum activity requirements, affiliate and Wikimedia Foundation staff and contractors (employed prior to 17 January 2022), and current and former Wikimedia Foundation trustees, will have the opportunity to vote on the enforcement guidelines proposal in SecurePoll.
You may vote from any single registered account you own on a Wikimedia wiki. You may only vote once, regardless of how many accounts you own. To qualify, this one account must:
- not be blocked in more than one project;
- and not be a bot;
- and have made at least 300 edits before 7 February 2022 across Wikimedia wikis;
- and have made at least 20 edits between 7 August 2021 and 7 February 2022.
The AccountEligibility tool can be used to quickly verify basic editor voting eligibility.
Developers qualify to vote if they:
- are Wikimedia server administrators with shell access
- or have made at least one merged commit to any Wikimedia repos on Gerrit, between 7 August 2021 and 7 February 2022
- or have made at least one merged commit to any repo in nonwmf-extensions or nonwmf-skins, between 7 August 2021 and 7 February 2022
- or have made at least one merged commit to any Wikimedia tool repo (for example magnustools) between 7 August 2021 and 7 February 2022.
- or have made at least 300 edits before 7 February 2022 and have made at least 20 edits between 7 August 2021 and 7 February 2022 on translatewiki.net.
- or maintainers/contributors of any tools, bots, user scripts, gadgets, and Lua modules on Wikimedia wikis.
- or have substantially engaged in the design and/or review processes of technical development related to Wikimedia.
Note: If you meet the main criteria, you will be able to vote immediately. Due to the technical limitations of SecurePoll, people who meet the additional criteria may not be able to directly vote, unless they meet any of the other criteria. If you think you meet the additional criteria, please email email@example.com with the reasoning at least four days before the last date for voting.
Wikimedia Foundation staff and contractorsEdit
Current Wikimedia Foundation staff and contractors qualify to vote if they have been employed by the Wikimedia Foundation as of 17 January 2022.
Wikimedia movement affiliates’ staff and contractorsEdit
Current Wikimedia Chapter, thematic organization or user group staff and contractors qualify to vote if they have been employed by their organization as of 17 January 2022.
Wikimedia Foundation board membersEdit
Current and former members of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees are qualified to vote.
- How can I verify my eligibility?
Editors can utilize the AccountEligibility tool to verify eligibility in the current election. The global account information page is available to learn more about your edit count and contribution history.
- How are eligibility requirements set?
The Wikimedia Foundation Board set the eligibility requirements prior to the start of the election. These are the same requirements used for the Board of Trustees elections.
- Eligible voter is unable to vote
You may receive a message: "Sorry, you are not in the predetermined list of users authorized to vote in this election."Solutions
Make sure you are logged in.
If you are a developer, Wikimedia Foundation staff member or Advisory Board member, the Elections Committee may not have been able to match you to a specific username. You should contact firstname.lastname@example.org to be added to the list.
If you are still unable to vote and believe you should be able to please leave a message on the election talk page or contact the Elections Committee at email@example.com. A response should be sent within 72 hours.
- I cannot log into VoteWiki
You do not need to log into VoteWiki to vote. If you see the ballot, then SecurePoll has successfully identified you. For security reasons, only a limited number of accounts are registered on VoteWiki.
- Is anyone able to see who I voted for?
No, the election is secure. The election uses SecurePoll software. Votes are secret. No one from the Elections Committee, the Board, or anyone on the Wikimedia Foundation staff has access to them. A member of the Trust & Safety team at the Wikimedia Foundation holds the encryption key for the election. Once the key is activated, the election is halted.
- What data is collected about voters?
Some personally identifiable data on voters is viewable by a select few persons who audit and tally the election. See the ratification scrutineers as announced above.
This includes the IP address and user agent. This data is automatically deleted 90 days after the election.
- How will this data be used?
Metrics about this election will be summarized on the election pages results on Meta and the post-analysis report of the election. No personally identifiable information will be published. This personally identifiable information may be used to determine the number of independent voters and the global spread of voters.
When I vote, I see no acknowledgement that the vote was received, and an automated message appears saying that I need to be logged in to vote. What is happening?
You do not need to log into votewiki to vote. This error is likely a caching issue. We apologise for this hassle: please try to vote again at m:Special:SecurePoll/vote/391.
This should prompt you with a message saying "The vote will be conducted on a central wiki. Please click the button below to be transferred." Clicking on the button will send you to the voting server and should allow you to vote.
Also note that you are free to assign or change your voting preferences as many times as you like. Only one vote per user will be stored, and the system will simply replace your old vote(s) with the new one, and discard any previous vote(s).
When your voting process is complete, a receipt is displayed on your screen, which you may retain as evidence that you have voted.
- How is the voting system safeguarded from users entering multiple votes?
Only one vote per user is stored on the system. You are free to assign or change your voting preferences as many times as you like. The system will simply replace your old vote(s) with the new one, and discard any previous vote(s).
- Are staff forced or encouraged to vote in a specific way?
No, the staff of the Wikimedia Foundation and those of the affiliates are not encouraged to vote in a specific way. We are encouraging everyone to vote independently. For the Code of Conduct enforcement guidelines to be effective, we need honest input to help us detect if there are areas of needed improvement.
- Is the Trust and Safety team biased with relation to the outcome of the vote?
The Trust and Safety unit has three arms: Policy, Disinformation, and Operations. The team facilitating the UCoC is the Policy team. The Policy team is not involved in investigations of user conduct. While it is not believed the Operations team is or would be biased, this separation of functions was intentional precisely to avoid inadvertent bias. The Policy team is not assessed by whether or not this collaboratively created document reaches approval on its first run or further development is needed. The team is however assessed on whether it works well with the community. This means developing a collaborative approach to enforcing the UCoC that will function for the community. Our goal is to meet that responsibility as well as possible.
- Other questions not mentioned here
For technical or vote system errors, please email firstname.lastname@example.org. Please specify the username you are trying to vote with and the project where you are trying to vote. A member of the project team will respond to your email as soon as possible.