On 28/12/2007, Ned Scott <ned(a)nedscott.com> wrote:
It's really not fair to say that such users are
unable to work
together. TTN, everyone, and myself, have continued to follow advice
about making more time for discussion and trying to help users
understand why these articles are being removed, rather than just
forcing the issue. This is one reason I didn't think the case needed
to be accepted. The real reason this was an arbcom case was because of
the very large amount of articles that were being redirected, and that
resulting in a lot of different people getting mad. That's very
different than trying different means of resolving the dispute. This
situation is far from hopeless, and despite the impressions you might
have gotten, no one wants to be at each other's throats.
Yeah. The reason the AC has historically avoided content issues is
because they are not and cannot be experts on everything, and really
can't tell when someone's wrong or right in the general case; only
their behaviour.
The other issue is good faith: everyone warring, at each others'
throats, is almost certainly honestly doing their best for an
encyclopedia. It's almost certain no-one is in fact aiming to do evil.
Sometimes, throwing it back is the least worst they can do. The ArbCom
is not your mother, even when you want them to be.
- d.