"John Lee" wrote
And judges don't make law. Let's be honest,
Charles - judges say they don't
make law, the arbcom says it doesn't make policy. In reality, both do. It's
just that the law isn't codified as a separate law - it is enshrined in the
precedent set.
AC cases are one-offs. They really are. They are supposed to fix up situations by a
mixture of equity and safeguarding the Wikipedia mission. There is no precedent set by a
remedy. Principles are pieces of reasoning drawing on written policy and other things, and
are mainly there to connect general understandings with the bottom line.
If this were not so, the Supreme Court of the US would
probably not be as powerful as it is today, and we wouldn't even have this
case (after all, proponents of BADSITES-ish policies often cite a particular
arbcom case when arguing their point).
I'm not American so I don't think along the same lines at all. Judge-made law can
be incorporated into legislation, or swept away by it. But in any case Arbitration should
attempt to do one job at a time well, not several but badly. And can't please
everyone.
Charles
-----------------------------------------
Email sent from
www.virginmedia.com/email
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam