If I used specific examples that would distract you from the underlying problems why arbcom is ineffective in resolving disputes.
- White Cat
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 21/03/2008, White Cat wikipedia.kawaii.neko@gmail.com wrote:
Is there any point why we even have arbcom? They do not seem to be doing much of resolving disputes lately. Granted they accept cases and close
them.
But by the time case is closed very little of the dispute is been
resolved.
Often disputes continue as if the RFAR wasn't filed.
They often do not respond to inquires in a timely fashion or at all.
They
ignore evidence or at least make statements that are directly
contradicted
by hard evidence. The remedies they pass generally are common-sense statements and nothing more. For example, they will say that
meatpupperary
is disruptive but they will not pass remedies in prevention of it.
They are not fair. They give a lot of leeway to long term trolls yet
they do
not give a fraction of that to good standing users. For example they
will
decline a case if is is not adequately engulfed in disruption. If you
want
your case to be heard by arbcom you need to be revert waring left right
or
else you will not be given much attention even if you exhaust dispute resolution.
Maybe it is time to dissolve arbcom.
If you wish you make accusations against ArbCom, you're going to need to be specific. Vague, general accusations will just be ignored.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l