User:TransporterMan/Sandbox/7

=Content Arbitration by Agreement Noticeboard=

' No one at Wikipedia has the right to make binding decisions about article content, but everyone at Wikipedia has the right to agree with another editor (or editors) on how article content will be written so long as they understand, first, that their decision must be in the best interest of the encyclopedia and, second,'' that their agreement is not binding on anyone other than themselves. '''

The purpose of this noticeboard is to provide arbitration by agreement only'' between editors who cannot come to an agreement on their own. In other words, if all editors in a dispute agree to this process then an arbitrator — an editor who meets certain experience criteria (but who is not usually either an administrator or a member of the Arbitration Committee) — will act as a judge and decide who wins the dispute. Decisions made here are not binding or enforceable, but editors who agree to this process also agree to abide by the decision as a matter of honor. In that light, the process here is a form of mediation and subject to the Mediation Policy.



Read all the following before making a request or response here. You will be wasting your (and our) time if you do not.

You are not required to participate in this process, but if you do choose to participate you will be held to have read, understood, and fully agree with all of the following rules and information.

Concept, process, requirements, and conditions
"CABA" means content arbitration by agreement under this noticeboard:
 * Concept: This noticeboard exists to provide a conceptual and procedural framework under which content arbitration by agreement can take place in a reliable and orderly manner. All participation here, by editors involved in a dispute and by volunteer arbitrators, is by informed unanimous consent and agreement to voluntarily abide by the standards set here. It is not intended to be the sole or only means by which content arbitration by agreement can take place: Any group of editors may agree to do arbitration by agreement wherever and upon whatever set of terms and conditions they may choose, but if they choose to use this set and do it here they do so on the mutual understanding and agreement that they will in good faith abide and conform to the standards, terms, and conditions established here.
 * Process: The basic process is as follows:
 * One party makes a request for CABA using the template provided below, naming the article where the dispute is occurring, the usernames of everyone involved in the dispute, a brief statement of what the dispute is about, and notifies everyone.
 * All other parties have 96 hours to give an initial indication of whether or not they are interested in participating in CABA and are willing to fulfill the requirements set out below and, if so, whether they agree on whether or not the summary of the case given by the filing party is sufficient; they may condition their approval on a better statement of the dispute being worked out through the arbitrator. No editor is ever required to agree to or participate in CABA. Any party who indicates interest or, later, makes a final agreement may withdraw from CABA at any time up until the arbitrator issues his or her decision.
 * If all named parties respond and say they are interested in going forward, an arbitrator will initially volunteer to consider the case.
 * The volunteer will, through discussion with the parties, write a precise statement of what is to be decided in the arbitration. At the same time, the parties will consider whether or not they are willing to accept the volunteer as the arbitrator of the case.
 * The volunteer will ask the parties to make a final agreement to engage in arbitration with him or her as the volunteer arbitrator on the dispute as written up by the volunteer. The parties will have 96 hours within which to respond.
 * If the parties all agree, then the CABA will proceed as stated below. If the parties all agree on the statement of the dispute, but not on the arbitrator, the arbitrator will resign and post a notice on the talk page of this noticeboard asking for a new volunteer and the case will go on hold until a new volunteer agrees to act as arbitrator, at which time the parties will have another 96 hours to review and approve or disapprove the new arbitrator. If the parties all agree on the arbitrator, but not on the statement of the dispute, the process will return to step 4, above. If the parties do not agree on both the statement and the arbitrator, both of the foregoing things shall be done.
 * If the CABA goes forward, the arbitrator will examine the prior discussion about the dispute and may either call for additional discussion or may ask specific questions of one or more or all parties. Once the arbitrator feels that he or she has a full understanding of the dispute, he or she may either call for final statements by the parties or may immediately issue his or her decision.
 * If a party withdraws from the arbitration after full agreement, but before the arbitrator's decision, the arbitrator will poll the remaining parties to determine whether all or some of them wish to continue without the withdrawing or declining parties. If so, the arbitration will continue with the remaining parties and will be binding on them as set out below, but will not be binding on the withdrawing and declining parties.
 * An arbitrator's decision will ordinarily be a summary decision which only says that one position is approved in whole or in part and the others are disapproved in whole or in part and only provide so much detail as is needed to make the decision and the effect of the decision clear. An arbitrator may, but in order to avoid further dissension ordinarily should not, explain the reasoning behind the decision.


 * Requirements and conditions:
 * No arbitration may go forward unless there has been exhaustive on-point discussion at the article talk page between the proposed parties. Statements made in edit summaries will not be considered. Discussions which are about conduct, rather than the content matter in question will also not be considered.
 * Conduct may not be the focus of an CABA, and conduct issues may not be raised or discussed on this noticeboard. Incivility will not be tolerated at this noticeboard.
 * All postings to this noticeboard are subject to the "Control of Mediation" subsection of the Mediation Policy and may be enforced by any volunteer prior to acceptance of a case by an arbitrator in process step 3, above, or by the arbitrator after acceptance in process step 3.
 * An arbitrator should be neutral and unbiased as to the parties, the article or articles, and the general subject matter in dispute, but the sole remedy for parties who believe a volunteer arbitrator is not neutral or biased is to either reject the arbitrator in step #5 above or to withdraw from the arbitration prior to the time the arbitrator issues his or her decision. Once an arbitrator's decision is issued, a party may not fail or decline to honor his or her agreement due to the actual or alleged non-neutrality or bias of the arbitrator.
 * Arbitrator's decisions must be in the best interest of the encyclopedia and in keeping with policy and guidelines.
 * An arbitrator's failure or alleged failure to comply with this rule does not, however, excuse a party from abiding by the arbitrator's decision.
 * An arbitrator is not limited to choosing between the positions advocated by the parties in rendering his decision, but may declare that all positions advocated by the parties are disapproved. In such a case, if an arbitrator decides that a position other than those advocated by the parties is the proper outcome to the dispute, the decision is binding on the parties only to the extent that their positions are disapproved; any comments by the arbitrator as to what the proper outcome actually is are non-binding on the parties unless all parties agree to accept that outcome.
 * An arbitrator may not approve a party's position which requires an IAR local exception to policy in order to be effective. A arbitrator may not decide that an IAR local exception is the proper outcome and disapprove a party's position which is in keeping with policy and guidelines. If the issue in dispute is, however, whether or not consensus has been reached on an attempt to create an IAR local exception, then an arbitrator may decide that question.
 * There is no appeal from an arbitrator's decision.
 * Part of the agreement of the parties will be that they will abide by the decision of the arbitrator and cease all further editing and discussion of the matter in dispute following the arbitrator's decision, save and except in accordance with that decision. The agreement to abide will be broadly interpreted so as to also prohibit picking at, finagling, carping about, or attempting to circumnavigate the decision by achieving the same result through different means, arguments, or reasons. The agreement to abide will last permanently as between the parties to the arbitration on the subject matter of the dispute. The decision of the arbitrator is not binding on any editor who was not a party in the arbitration. If an editor not involved in the arbitration should raise the same dispute, any party to the mediation may again become involved in editing and discussion of the matter in dispute, but only in accordance with the decision of the arbitrator.
 * The agreements of the parties to abide by the decision of the arbitrator are binding only in the honor of the parties. If a party should violate their agreement to abide by the decision, they will not be subject to being blocked, banned, topic-banned, or interaction-banned due only to their failure to abide, but their failure to abide may be considered as one item of evidence by the community, by any administrator, or by the Arbitration Committee in deciding whether the party is editing disruptively, in bad faith, or in some other way which is not in the best interest of the encyclopedia.

Current requests
'''NOTE: This is a draft, not a currently operational noticeboard. Please do not make requests at this time. If you might be interested in this before this noticeboard becomes active (if ever), I will consider individual requests on my user talk page.'''