stevertigo wrote:
horse-trading and straw polls which are part of the proper work of a committee. In fact Arbitration cases generate acres of material showing how decisions are made; and in most cases (not all) what appears on the wiki is at least a fair record of how a decision was reached.
Ah. "Horse trading" as in I will agree to ban Peter for one year, if you agree to ban Paul or two? In the context of Arbitration, the practice is actually quite a DBAD violation.
No, you misunderstand. When a case is clearly not going to get closed with the current set of findings, someone has to initiate a phase of discussion that ends with a better set of proposed findings, incorporating modifications that have broader support. Try AGF.
Charles