On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Lunalunasantin@gmail.com wrote:
It's almost as if the vast bulk of discussion takes place on the wiki, or something.
So, anyway, no. High level dispute resolution deliberations don't seem to happen on the wiki, and this has brought about a general lack of responsiveness, and has also negated open discussion itself to a certain degree.
Keep in mind that people get their motivation from different places - and in my case my recent Arbitration case left me with a certain reminder of something that I had not dealt with before - that Arbcom's deliberations are private, it does not like treating people like people, and it thinks of itself as a kind of monolith of decision. So, the idea I had a few years ago about a 'formal process for resolving disputes' has been a resounding success, but it has also become quite bureaucratic, overworked, and insular.
That, specifically, is something I find missing from your proposal: an earnest explanation of what this gives us that on-wiki discussion cannot. Personally, I think it sounds likely to fragment discussion and encourage forum shopping, aside from giving people the feeling they've been run around -- even if you personally have a firm idea of the list's remit, other people will not.
An open mailing list for dispute resolution will bring about greater openness and wikilove.
It's true though that I long ago argued that wikien-l was not the place for discussing on-wiki disputes, and its gratifying to see how people have over time incorporated that idea. But its my notion that we can and should discuss dispute resolutions in a more open and centralized way, and I think a dedicated mailing list would work in that respect.
Your increasingly incessant personal attacks and use of the royal "we" -- what else could you be referring to? -- are a but off-putting, as well.
I appreciate the fact that someone perceived as making personal attacks will be chastised by you and others, but the fact of the matter is that I have never made any personal attacks against Cary or anyone else in this matter. A couple sarcastic or pointy responses to similarly sarcastic or rude commentary do not qualify. Your "incessant" term is a gross mischaracterization.
-Stevertigo