Minor correction, because I think I've been insufficiently fine grained in this paragraph. A slight re-wording:
(Snip)
BLP is an example of this latter role. There are good reasons why BLP matters, and yet instead of focussing on them, we have some degree of persistent issues over the interpretation and enforcement of this norm. This has led to editing concerns surrounding some BLP articles (or as some see it, BLPs generally). Arbcom's role here is to identify the issue, and to identify its best resolution within communal principles, if we are able, and take the steps we deem necessary to ensure communal norms do in fact get taken seriously in this most crucial type of article, as near to "all the time" as we can. To be plain, we do that in /every/ case we hear, whether the principle forgotten by the parties is BLP, NEUTRALITY, or some other.
That is where "serving a project to write an encyclopedia" comes into its own. Whilst the communal voice matters, it is only half of the equation, and sometimes (often), it needs balancing by re-affirming the other half (that the community's role is to write an encyclopedia). Despite much discussion and debate, and many attempts to find a working consensus by talk page and project page posting, the community has not fully achieved what it hoped to on BLP, and concerns persist. There is so much dispute over BLPs as a principle, that the simple issue we all agree on as a practical requirement - very high quality - is being insufficiently enforced. This may help remedy that, and although there may be many approaches and many views, this along with the guidance being drafted is the one we feel goes directly to the point. Given the singular lack of strong and effective enforcement measures that the community has produced for itself by dialog in the areas of communal concern, and which are needed to back the essentials of writing encyclopedic BLP articles to the standards aspired by the spirit of BLP policy in contentious cases, this may help. If not, we'll try something else.
Second paragraph slightly reworded to make clear what exactly is being referred to here. My apologies, and consider my first email amended.
FT2