One problem that has emerged is that the assigned person from the mentorship committee can be easily drawn into becoming an advocate of the user on probation. This recently happened in the case of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mentorship_Committee#Onefortyone
where one of the members of the committee ended up being banned for 24 hours for breaking 3RR
No one would be placed on probation by the arbitration committee if there were not other users who had been complaining about their behavior. Those parties can be expected to still be watching the articles in question and to have strong opinions on the matter.
Fred
On Nov 14, 2005, at 10:36 AM, David Gerard wrote:
Arkady Rose wrote:
There are enough accusations of major decision-making being made by "secret cabals" already as it is; this is just one more thing to substantiate such suspicians and conspiracy theories.
It's more a case of people using a handy real-time communication mechanism to resolve a problem quickly. In this case it's potential upside without much downside, and you can be sure lots of people will be watching them like hawks.
Most, if not all, of the accusations of cabalism are spurious. You'll also see a lot more of it on this list than is warranted, as wikien-l is pretty much the official sewer for en:. The listadmins are a lot nicer about letting people kicked off the wiki or ignored on the wiki complain here.
Not everything should go through committee committees to form a committee on the committees before someone can do something. We got a taste of this with the checkuser issue just recently, where we slogged through bureaucratic swamps for weeks, finally reached a decision, then the stewards decided it'd be a fine idea to start the entire damn discussion from scratch. Bureaucratic instruction creep.
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l