Okay. I an committed. I will  post this.

First off. The whole situation about the mediation
committee has two/three nasty connotations.

There is an advertisement with a dog that says:
"Do as we like, or the dog dies!"

I (personally) think that the mediation committee
is under a similar threat, and for similar reasons.

The truth is that we should not upholdd the mediation
committee any longer than it has a practical
justification.

The puppy has to catch the rabbit, or off to the
butchers with it!!

I personally have no idea why Jimbo qualified me for the
mediation committee. Maybe perhaps because to do otherwise
would mean that he would have to explain any and all other
similar decicions.

I know Angela and Stevertigo from the process of bringing
up the cleanup process. My own intent was to improve the
process of wikipedia in a manner that would remain an
improvement, rather than a shackle on its further
developement. I hope I can restrain myself into not
playing any part in its further developement.

Geoff (llwyrch) I know not at all.

Sannse (did I misspell the username?) I know even less,
except a vague, and I must claim irrelevant
impression (no justification, please lambast me if it
is crappy; I will be the last person to require definitive
determination) that she is a female.

Uncle Ed; I personally do not trust, even though I have seen
his actions and speech on this forum. To me he is much like
I see myself; an unsolved equation, maybe negative, maybe
positive, maybe the very zero point of the equation...

Anthere: I would be much more comfortable about contributing
in the meditiation group, if you were not a member of it!

PLEASE anthere, think long before getting offended by the
previous sentence! I think you can perform a valuable part
in forming the limitations of the mediation group, but I
honestly don't see that you can offer anything positive to
it's developement as a member of it.

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen (aka Cimon Avaro)