Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales wrote:
Rebecca wrote:
There's absolutely no reason why said
arbitrator should be allowed to
continue serving - he wasn't elected, he's done basically nothing in
months, and he's been approached about the matter several times, with,
as far as I can see, no response. While we've just had elections, now
seems to me to be the perfect time to do something - there's a couple
of people who only missed out by one or two votes who would be quite
capable replacements.
I agree with this completely. Will you research for me which arbs
have been least active, and I'll email to ask them about their plans
for the future, and then make some decisions.
I already did this before the election, to try and move the issue along.
See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee#Level_of_…
Since then, we've elected replacements for Camembert and Gutza, while
Mav and Delirium have stepped up their participation in the process
again. That leaves Nohat.
There's no indignity in
people stepping down because they won't have time to deal with it.
None at all, as I've tried to point out. But as the position of
arbitrator has evolved, it carries with it a certain obligation to the
community - more so than admins, who aren't individually required to
exercise their functions if they don't feel like handling, say, page
protections. Part of that obligation is knowing when to step aside.
--Michael Snow