Daniel Mayer wrote:
--- Rick <giantsrick13(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
You're awfully naive, Jimbo.
That's an awfully rude statement, Rick.
No, I don't think so. I am naive and optimistic and trusting. These
are good traits that can sometimes go bad.
Rick's a little heated up here, I guess, but really what interests me
is substantive discussions of policy and how it ought to change. Rick
has brought up an issue of "meta policy", that is to say, can the
arbitration committee issue rulings that change policy?
It's not an easy question to answer, I think. In general of course
the answer is "no" -- the community sets policy, and the arbcom
adjudicates disputes within the framework of policy.
But as with questions of whether judges in wider society can (or
should) change policy, it's not so easy often to draw the line between
"following the law" and "making the law". This is particularly true
when there are issues of interpretation and application.