--- Erik Moeller erik_moeller@gmx.de wrote:
I will state here for the record that I'm strongly opposed to any content arbitration committee. Decisions like this should be made by the community, not by elected or appointed representatives. The solution to dealing with prolonged disputes is to establish clear community procedures to make decisions, such as binding votes under clear conditions (e.g. a discussion has been going on for X weeks, all arguments have been summarized, all options of the vote have been agreed upon in consensus ..). Wikipedia does not need an editorial staff.
The ArbCom already tries to enforce our content-related policies. What I'd like to do is have subject-area subcommittees to consult when alleged violations of our content-related polices like NPOV or NOR come before us (the ArbCom). As it is, only the most blatant POV and original research-pushing people are sanctioned due to the simple fact that the ArbCom does not know everything about everything and thus can't spot more subtle violations of our content-related polices. We have tried, but this results in cases that take months and inadequate remedies.
Here is my proposal:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/RFC#Alternat...
-- mav
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com