Jimbo wrote (in part)
The Mav/168 situation strikes me as being like that. Here we have two valued contributors arguing endlessly about something that outside parties see as entirely pointless (the wording of the introductory paragraph of [[DNA]], where there's nothing transparently wrong about either alternative, and it seems impossible that there could be no compromise).
They want to go to arbitration over it.
Jimbo, have you read any of Anthere's messages on this? She has written to the list and privately to the mediators (copied to you).
mav and 168 *have* been in mediation. Anthere has spent considerable time and effort in trying to find solutions. Suggesting the mediation step was slighted is really unfair to her.
The real issues are *not* the DNA paragraph, they are issues of perceived sysop abuse on one side and perceived unfairness on the other. I realise you have a lot of reading to do, not a lot of time and so are likely to miss things, but this is an important point to acknowledge.
--sannse