-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
geni wrote:
Disscussion of changes to election procedures were held at [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2005/Proposed modifications to rules]]. In the spirit of slow change those were started in august.
Curious. I was under the impression that those were essentially a joke. The last time I looked, not one of the proposals wasn't (a) already discussed at length and, by consensus, dismissed, and (b) made in any sort of constructive way - most of them were proposed changes on what the Committee was, rather than how to help it do its job effectively, and there was no differentiation between changes to the voting system and changes to the system being voted upon.
I do note, looking at it now, that on both these points the discussions seem to have improved to an extent, but it's disheartening in the extreme to see that no-one has attempted to refactor the page for usefulness (for example, proposals 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, and 11, at the very least, seem to have been rejected by most participants, yet they remain on the page, just the same as all the others).
We've been doing this for two whole years now. Couldn't some of the people who - despite **not a single change or new statement made in the past month** have all of a sudden started protesting (and, I must point out, entirely justifiably) - have actually tried to start a real discussion, instead of a point-by-point aimless hybrid nothingness of a set of discussions randomly and uselessly lumped together.
Yours, - -- James D. Forrester Wikimedia : [[W:en:User:Jdforrester|James F.]] E-Mail : james@jdforrester.org IM (MSN) : jamesdforrester@hotmail.com