I think I'd rather wait and see how arbitration actually goes with him on the committee and see what his expressed attitudes actually mean in practice. He has been quite open about hostility to certain policies. Others on the committee may also have trouble with certain policies, but haven't voiced their policy preferences so openly. I certainly haven't, although my attitudes are notorious enough. The question is, sitting on a Wikipedia committee, the purpose of which is to carry out Wikipedia policy, are you willing to do that; or do will you use your role as an arbitrator to continue policy debate, picking and chosing which policies deserve enforcement, which don't.
But then, some policies are more important than others. That we can expect to see reflected in the nature of matters which users bring to the attention of the mediation and arbitration committees.
Fred
From: Rick <giantsrick13@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l@Wikipedia.org>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 15:58:42 -0800 (PST)
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l@Wikipedia.org>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Arbitration progress report #2
I request Sean Barrett's removal from the arbitration committee.
RickK
Sean Barrett <sean@epoptic.org> wrote:
> I question your suitability for the role of arbitrator based on your
> condescention towards those who want the wikipedia policies enforced.
You told me to work to have the policy changed; I tell you to work to
have me removed. Jimbo appointed me; convince him to remove me. As
an alternative, if a simple majority of my fellow arbiters ask me to
step down, I will.
> The only argument you have given
> against enforcing such rules is that your time is too precious.
I haven't even given that argument, and I don't intend to give any
arguments. I simply refuse to be compelled to arbitrate the way you
think I should.
> So would it be correct to conclude that you either you think that nobody will
> be driven away by personal attacks, or it is not worth your time to retain
> these contributors?
Co nclude what you like. I am a free man. You cannot compel me to
rule on a case I don't choose to rule on. I encourage you, however,
to work on impeaching me from the arbitration committee.
> I will also put to you my opinion that in cases where
> there has been a gross violation of policies such as "no personal attacks",
> all the arbitration committee will have to do is the following:
And I suspect that in cases where there has been a gross violation of
the "no personal attacks" policy, there will be contemporaneous
violations such as edit warring, which I agree rise to a level
requiring arbitration.
> Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
Don't forget to inform the arbitration committee of my dereliction of
duty, and impress upon Jimbo the urgency of appointing arbiters who
will always rule the way you tell them to.
--
Sean Barrett | To bite off your shadow is neither easy
sean@epoptic.com | no r painless. It demands a single-mindedness
| that is almost unknown in this day.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l