Welcome to Codidact Meta!
Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.
Post History
Since Codidact was founded, we have had one rule leading our path every step of the way. It's the rule that community comes first. That the Codidact "staff" shouldn’t overrule the community, but co...
#7: Question closed
by
ArtOfCode
·
2020-11-21T21:10:58Z (about 4 years ago)
#6: Question reopened
by
ArtOfCode
·
2020-11-21T21:10:52Z (about 4 years ago)
#5: Question closed
by
luap42
·
2020-08-18T15:55:43Z (over 4 years ago)
#4: Post undeleted
by
luap42
·
2020-08-12T14:48:05Z (over 4 years ago)
#3: Post deleted
by
luap42
·
2020-08-12T14:42:42Z (over 4 years ago)
#2: Post edited
by
luap42
·
2020-07-07T21:23:53Z (over 4 years ago)
No download
- Since Codidact was founded, we have had one rule leading our path every step of the way. It's the rule that **community comes first**. That the Codidact "staff" shouldn’t overrule the community, but could be overruled by it.
- In any community, acts of moderation should be rare. And even rarer is the need to review these decisions. However, there will inevitably be cases where certain situations need to be reviewed:
- 1. Users think that an action (for example, a suspension) is wrong or even malicious.
- 2. A moderator might misbehave and violate our light Code of Conduct or our Terms of Service.
- I want to emphasize that there have been no such cases yet, and there will likely (and hopefully) not be for months, if not years. But we can be sure that there will be one at some point in the future. When this situation does arrive, it's better to have an existing process that can be followed to guarantee the best resolution of the conflict rather than coming up with a brand new process on the spot.
- It should be clear that such a process shouldn't involve "us" (the Codidact team), but rather "you" (the community). Hence, at some point, it was decided on the old forum that we'd eventually have some kind of review panel, which would be responsible for these cases.
- While there will probably be no "panel elections" for the time being, because the panel members would still be a large percentage of our community members (which wouldn't exactly make sense at this stage), we have made a start on the Panel review process. It is based on these three principles:
- 1. The Panel decisions are binding to moderators and the Codidact team[^1].
- 2. Every party should be heard before any decision is made.
- 3. The Panel shall be independent and impartial.
- This process is currently only a draft. We'd like your feedback, and welcome any suggestions for changes to it. Please leave them in answers to this question.
You can find our current draft **[here](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/luap42/hosting/master/DRAFT%20Codidact%20Arbitration%20%26%20Review%20Panel%20-%20Governing%20Rules-1.pdf)**.- [^1]: For obvious reasons, there are some legal limits. However, in these cases, we have tried to strike a balance between legal and community interests. For example, in such a case, the Panel may decide to publish our reasons (with private information redacted).
- Since Codidact was founded, we have had one rule leading our path every step of the way. It's the rule that **community comes first**. That the Codidact "staff" shouldn’t overrule the community, but could be overruled by it.
- In any community, acts of moderation should be rare. And even rarer is the need to review these decisions. However, there will inevitably be cases where certain situations need to be reviewed:
- 1. Users think that an action (for example, a suspension) is wrong or even malicious.
- 2. A moderator might misbehave and violate our light Code of Conduct or our Terms of Service.
- I want to emphasize that there have been no such cases yet, and there will likely (and hopefully) not be for months, if not years. But we can be sure that there will be one at some point in the future. When this situation does arrive, it's better to have an existing process that can be followed to guarantee the best resolution of the conflict rather than coming up with a brand new process on the spot.
- It should be clear that such a process shouldn't involve "us" (the Codidact team), but rather "you" (the community). Hence, at some point, it was decided on the old forum that we'd eventually have some kind of review panel, which would be responsible for these cases.
- While there will probably be no "panel elections" for the time being, because the panel members would still be a large percentage of our community members (which wouldn't exactly make sense at this stage), we have made a start on the Panel review process. It is based on these three principles:
- 1. The Panel decisions are binding to moderators and the Codidact team[^1].
- 2. Every party should be heard before any decision is made.
- 3. The Panel shall be independent and impartial.
- This process is currently only a draft. We'd like your feedback, and welcome any suggestions for changes to it. Please leave them in answers to this question.
- You can find our current draft **[here](https://luap42.github.io/hosting/DRAFT%20Codidact%20Arbitration%20&%20Review%20Panel%20-%20Governing%20Rules-1.pdf)**.
- [^1]: For obvious reasons, there are some legal limits. However, in these cases, we have tried to strike a balance between legal and community interests. For example, in such a case, the Panel may decide to publish our reasons (with private information redacted).
#1: Initial revision
by
luap42
·
2020-07-07T20:46:02Z (over 4 years ago)
Since Codidact was founded, we have had one rule leading our path every step of the way. It's the rule that **community comes first**. That the Codidact "staff" shouldn’t overrule the community, but could be overruled by it. In any community, acts of moderation should be rare. And even rarer is the need to review these decisions. However, there will inevitably be cases where certain situations need to be reviewed: 1. Users think that an action (for example, a suspension) is wrong or even malicious. 2. A moderator might misbehave and violate our light Code of Conduct or our Terms of Service. I want to emphasize that there have been no such cases yet, and there will likely (and hopefully) not be for months, if not years. But we can be sure that there will be one at some point in the future. When this situation does arrive, it's better to have an existing process that can be followed to guarantee the best resolution of the conflict rather than coming up with a brand new process on the spot. It should be clear that such a process shouldn't involve "us" (the Codidact team), but rather "you" (the community). Hence, at some point, it was decided on the old forum that we'd eventually have some kind of review panel, which would be responsible for these cases. While there will probably be no "panel elections" for the time being, because the panel members would still be a large percentage of our community members (which wouldn't exactly make sense at this stage), we have made a start on the Panel review process. It is based on these three principles: 1. The Panel decisions are binding to moderators and the Codidact team[^1]. 2. Every party should be heard before any decision is made. 3. The Panel shall be independent and impartial. This process is currently only a draft. We'd like your feedback, and welcome any suggestions for changes to it. Please leave them in answers to this question. You can find our current draft **[here](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/luap42/hosting/master/DRAFT%20Codidact%20Arbitration%20%26%20Review%20Panel%20-%20Governing%20Rules-1.pdf)**. [^1]: For obvious reasons, there are some legal limits. However, in these cases, we have tried to strike a balance between legal and community interests. For example, in such a case, the Panel may decide to publish our reasons (with private information redacted).