833
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 342:
Line 342: + +
→Confused by current language
:I think wiki vandalism is a violation of the membership agreement. and we can review and reuse the Wikipedia[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism Vandalism] page for help in deciding what falls under vandalism. [[User:Skm|Skm]] ([[User talk:Skm|talk]]) 08:25, 28 July 2015 (CDT)
:I think wiki vandalism is a violation of the membership agreement. and we can review and reuse the Wikipedia[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism Vandalism] page for help in deciding what falls under vandalism. [[User:Skm|Skm]] ([[User talk:Skm|talk]]) 08:25, 28 July 2015 (CDT)
:::Vandalism implies ill will. Two members could have a legitimate disagreement over a matter of policy. I don't see how this could be resolved definitively without resorting to a board or member vote. JFDI is not appropriate to set policy that actually needs to be enforced or which the organization needs to rely upon for a legal defense. It has no official standing, so it would need a vote to delegate this authority, and to define procedures to govern conflict resolution, otherwise any JFDI Policy is invalid. It sounds like this would give any one of four hundred members the power to bind the other 399. --[[User:Rdpierce|Rdpierce]] ([[User talk:Rdpierce|talk]]) 10:04, 28 July 2015 (CDT)