--- Daniel Mayer maveric149@yahoo.com wrote:
--- Robert Brookes the_robert_brookes@yahoo.com wrote:
As I am currently unable to defend myself due to a block on my proxy server (through some other
activity
by someone else) I post here in the hopr that it
can
be inserted as my first comment under the
"Statement
by affected party".
Can you edit without using the open proxy? If not, then what is the IP address so that this can be unblocked?
198.54.202.242
I quote from my request for mediation: ....
Unfortunately the mediation process is not really functional at this time. So for now at least the ArbCom is not expecting people to seek mediation as part of 'trying and failing to resolve the issue using the other steps of the dispute resolution process.'
-- mav
Thank you for your reply. I think I should add James W. Rosenzweig's comment from my RfA as it has bearing on the issues:
"As mediation seems to be at the crux of this, I'd just like to note that, as a member of the MC and apparently its future Chair (unless someone decides they want the job), we don't have our act together right now and are unlikely to in the next several weeks. While certainly mediation can occur outside of the MC, I think it's fair to say that right now Wikipedia doesn't have a fully functioning formal mediation process, though it certainly should by this time next month. I don't know if that impacts your decision, but thought you'd want to be aware, at least. Jwrosenzweig 22:35, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)"
This state of affairs is lamentable. If mediation is indeed to be a part of the Wikipedia dispute resolution process then an effort must be made to keep the structures functioning. Pity fewer people seem willing to volunteer as mediators than are queuing in line to become administrators so they can block and ban people at will. Sad for Wikipedia.
So what to do about a belligerent who spurns mediation?
Beats me, Robert
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com