Recently a Wikipedia editor e-mailed me regarding concerns she had about the ArbCom process. In particular, she was looking at an ArbCom case brought up against an editor who (aside from a couple of articles) has added little in the way of actual content, copyedits, or housekeeping to the project, but who has long been noted for personal attacks, trolling, edit-warring, and who has been temp-banned more than once. As seems to be typical in these cases, the person being brought before ArbCom created a "counter arbitration" defense against one complainant in particular (a long time contributer of much valued content, though perhaps given to getting a little personal in disputes). As a matter of policy, the behaviour of those who were bringing the complaint was examined with equal intensity. As the person e-mailing me put it
"It looks like the arbcom is going to put them both on POV parole, which is silly; they have this thing about equal treatment. It's like if I report someone to the police for a theft, the police first of all have to investigate whether I've committed theft too, because if they charge one, they have to charge both."
Is this a valid concern?
Jay.