Wikipedia:WikiProject ArbCom Reform Party/Bill of Rights

Proposed: that the ArbCom Reform Party will uphold an editors' bill of rights, which could include:


 * 1) Freedom of speech. Editors shall enjoy the right to form and support political parties expressing their opinions about the best ways to operate Wikipedia. All editors should have the right to do what they wish with some reasonable quantity of user space without suffering AfD or AN/I evaluations regarding the NPOV, soapboxing, scope, or relevance of their contributions.
 * 2) Legitimate private identities. Though they may be subject to block in cases of abuse, ArbCom shall not require or initiate the public disclosure of alternate accounts used for legitimate reasons, nor of any party's actual name or private information. Official postings about an individual under his own name – such as a block notice on an account in his name – must strictly comply with WP:BLP.
 * 3) Innocent until proven guilty. If an editor is blocked for an erroneous reason, he has the right to be unblocked first, with a block notice acknowledging the error, before any other decision is made about his conduct. He shall not be subjected to a succession of new charges during an unblock request in an attempt by an admin to avoid reversing the block, but shall face any subsequent allegations by the normal procedures.
 * 4) No general accusations. A person cannot become a bad editor by making good edits. When each individual edit is acceptable under Wikipedia policy, he shall not be subject to penalty because of the "overall bias" or effect of such edits taken in collective.
 * 5) Right to refuse self-incrimination. No editor shall be compelled under threat of sanction to request or authorize administrative action on another WMF project, nor to turn over passwords or other private records from off-Wiki sites, nor to "Facebook friend" or otherwise invite Arbitration representatives into positions of confidence to increase their access to off-site information.
 * 6) Trial by jury. When there is significant disagreement over the facts of a case, i.e. whether an editor's actions were permitted by policy, the editor shall have the right to request a pool of editors be canvassed and invited to join the discussion as jurors, who have been chosen by a provably random method biased toward selecting jurors who have been recently active within a range of times of day that is most convenient for the defendant. The accused shall have a brief period before jurors are canvassed to make a limited number of peremptory challenges. As jury duty cannot be compelled, sufficient editors must be canvassed as a matter of practice to ensure that there are enough jurors to develop a meaningful consensus. Jurors will be asked to evaluate whether each alleged offense was contrary to policy that existed at the time it was committed, and may make recommendations on the severity of the penalty to be imposed.
 * 7) Public trial. Wherever ArbCom is permitted to do so by policy, the accused shall have the right to request that any ArbCom decision be made in public proceedings on the Wiki, rather than in decisions in email.
 * 8) Statute of limitations. Except when mandated by the WMF, there shall be an absolute maximum duration for all indefinite bans and blocks.
 * 9) Right to appeal. Every editor, regardless of position or status, shall have the right to appeal to Jimbo Wales and other WMF personnel for the reduction of sanctions or for a conditional threat of sanctions to be vacated.
 * 10) Equal rights. No editor shall be denied the right to ask a Reference Desk question, or make any other edit that would be permitted another editor, based on the knowledge that he suffers from an illness or abnormality. Editors shall not be disparaged or unequally treated based on race, religion, sex or sexual orientation, or similar considerations, nor due to any good faith complaint they make of ill-treatment on such basis, even if turns out to be unsubstantiated.