[WikiEN-l] extremely weak dispute resolution mechanisms

[Peter Mackay]

> From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org 
> [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Poor, Edmund W
> Sent: Tuesday, 29 November 2005 02:45
> To: English Wikipedia
> Subject: RE: [WikiEN-l] extremely weak dispute resolution mechanisms
> 
> > > This can also be done by a single admin, e.g. this is mostly what 
> > > Linuxbeak is applying to his dear little charges - beat 
> them around 
> > > the head with a cluebat until they realise he means it, 
> then gently 
> > > suggest they behave with suggestions of how to. It's 
> sometimes more 
> > > work than it seems like it should be, but can work if the 
> idjit is 
> > > cluifiable at all.
> > 
> > Don't be too hard on yourself, David.
> > 
> > Peter (Skyring)
> 
> Our whole process of "dispute resolution" needs an overhaul. 
> It's slipped down to relativism:
> 
> We are viewing each dispute in a moral vacuum, with both 
> parties considered to have equal standing. This can never work.
> 
> IF one party is strongly upholding our civility or accuracy 
> standards (or making a plea for Neutrality on a Controversial 
> Topic), while the other insists on being uncivil, adding 
> inaccurate information, or using the article to push their 
> point of view (POV) 
> 
> THEN
> 
> * it's not a matter of two people "disputing"
> * it's a matter of one party being "right" and the other 
> party being "wrong"
> 
> Let's change our procedures so that there's a way to enforce 
> civility and accuracy as key values of our community - and 
> stamp out bias too!

I'm totally in favour of this.

The point I was making in what may have been too subtle a fashion, is that
far too often disputes are concluded in a rankist fashion. Being a WP editor
for years doesn't make someone right (or wrong, for that matter), but it
certainly allows them to push their opinion further.

Peter (Skyring)