On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 17:51, Anthere wrote: 
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen a écrit:

>     Ok, Maybe you want them to be able to impose short bans, protect
>     pages... 
> 
> 
> Yup. For starters..
> 
>     What? 
> 
> 
> Anything that will give timely relief, but will not be so heavy as to be
> considered a serious sanction which previously would have been the sole 
> prerogative of Jimbo. Basically anything that won't cause the general
> editorship or your operation to cry foul.
> 
> J-V Heiskanen
...snip... 
I will cite some words by Jussi

"Are there technical facilities besides the bulletin board that we could 
and should have at our disposal?

Or are there justifieable fears of misuse? Should there be a 
non-mediator (an arbitrator perhaps) specifically tasked with providing 
special technical assistance for mediators?"

Oh, that reminds me. If the mediation committee is reconstituted into a
_real_ arbitration committee (on the basis of two arbitrators per case and
umpirage provided by a third chosen by the two disputant-chosen ones), it
would of course mean that we too would have to be voted in/out, just like
the current "judiciary committee", otherwise we should not be entrusted with
powers beyond those of other admins.

J-V Heiskanen