One problem that has emerged is that the assigned person from the
mentorship committee can be easily drawn into becoming an advocate of
the user on probation. This recently happened in the case of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mentorship_Committee#Onefortyone
where one of the members of the committee ended up being banned for
24 hours for breaking 3RR
No one would be placed on probation by the arbitration committee if
there were not other users who had been complaining about their
behavior. Those parties can be expected to still be watching the
articles in question and to have strong opinions on the matter.
Fred
On Nov 14, 2005, at 10:36 AM, David Gerard wrote:
Arkady Rose wrote:
There are enough accusations of major
decision-making being made by
"secret cabals" already as it is; this is just one more thing to
substantiate such suspicians and conspiracy theories.
It's more a case of people using a handy real-time communication
mechanism to resolve a problem quickly. In this case it's potential
upside without much downside, and you can be sure lots of people will
be watching them like hawks.
Most, if not all, of the accusations of cabalism are spurious. You'll
also see a lot more of it on this list than is warranted, as wikien-l
is pretty much the official sewer for en:. The listadmins are a lot
nicer about letting people kicked off the wiki or ignored on the wiki
complain here.
Not everything should go through committee committees to form a
committee on the committees before someone can do something. We got a
taste of this with the checkuser issue just recently, where we slogged
through bureaucratic swamps for weeks, finally reached a decision,
then the stewards decided it'd be a fine idea to start the entire damn
discussion from scratch. Bureaucratic instruction creep.
- d.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l