Fred Bauder a écrit:
Suppose we did require cooperation with mediation and consider how the user conducted themselves and sanction those who don't cooperate. What do we gain, what do we lose?
Fred
I would be happy to have a legal person give his opinion here.
In real life, mediation is essentially a choice, not a requirement/obligation. I am a little dubious of the deep underlying significance of being punished for refusing mediation when in conflict. I also fear "refusing cooperation" in mediation would have to be a decision of the mediator... which implies a loss of neutrality... as well as requires a mandatory report of the mediator to the arbcom... possibly fueling a bad relationship between the mediator and the people in conflict. Since the relationship should be first based in confidence, I am perplex of the implications it might result to.
If this is done, I hope mediators will not be *required* necessarily to report on the mediation outcome and details of cooperation or non cooperation, but that it will be at least a choice.
Ant