"Thomas Dalton" wrote
On 14/10/2007, charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
"Sam Blacketer"
The key problem is the temporary absence of active arbitrators. The arbitrators are presumably unwilling to resign and lose their place entirely.
As far as I can see, the ArbCom has always burned out Arbitrators at a rate of about one every six weeks. Matters are not going to be improved by unseating them and not allowing them to return if they get a second wind.
Which is exactly why that's not what he suggested...
The key problems, in fact, are these:
- cases getting harder - innovation in remedies is no longer solving things - AC tending to be split, which is what leads to the longest delays - tendency now to delay closures for just one point, i.e. perfectionism in an imperfect system - entrenched issues on the site such as COI that would justify a less patient, non-judicial approach - also, matters that really require executive action being sent to the AC, where they can swamp other discussion - the volume of informal appeals sent to the AC list - Arbs also operating Oversight (very active now) and CheckUser functions
These are the new factors. The old factors are fairly well known.
Charles
----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam