The mediation committee has refused to mediate in any circumstance or issue for which I am a participant. What is the point of this committee, if it refuses to even attempt mediation with some of the supposedly more "mediationally-challenged" users?
I think everyone on the mediation committee should be asked to resign, so that we can get some users who actually want to mediate and facilitate discussion. It seems clear to me that these people only took the position because they saw it as a way of becoming "super-sysops" -- not because they really wanted to undertake the effort of mediation.
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
--- A [name omitted for privacy reasons] wikilir@yahoo.com wrote:
The mediation committee has refused to mediate in any circumstance or issue for which I am a participant. What is the point of this committee, if it refuses to even attempt mediation with some of the supposedly more "mediationally-challenged" users?
I think everyone on the mediation committee should be asked to resign, so that we can get some users who actually want to mediate and facilitate discussion. It seems clear to me that these people only took the position because they saw it as a way of becoming "super-sysops" -- not because they really wanted to undertake the effort of mediation.
Asked to resign? Who will take their place?
Not me, oh no siree, I can't be bothered. I work full time and have a life. I usually just delete commments in the mailing list (except Jimbo and this one, which was luckily at the top.) The precious free time I spend on Wikipedia, I add stuff to articles. Am still trying to figure out the inner workings of the Hyundai group...
Of course, the mediation committee should be able to ban users who are not willing to enter into discussion. That goes without saying. This way, if a user ignores the mediation committee, no more w for them.
===== Christopher Mahan chris_mahan@yahoo.com 818.943.1850 cell http://www.christophermahan.com/
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
Christopher Mahan wrote:
--- A [name omitted for privacy reasons] wikilir@yahoo.com wrote:
The mediation committee has refused to mediate in any circumstance or issue for which I am a participant. What is the point of this committee, if it refuses to even attempt mediation with some of the supposedly more "mediationally-challenged" users?
I think everyone on the mediation committee should be asked to resign, so that we can get some users who actually want to mediate and facilitate discussion. It seems clear to me that these people only took the position because they saw it as a way of becoming "super-sysops" -- not because they really wanted to undertake the effort of mediation.
Maybe we just look at mediation in different ways. Any person that the parties will listen to should be able to act as a mediator, and if he can find a solution by his informal means the Wikipedia will be the richer by that. Hopefully we can all do that from time to time, as when we see an edit war in progress and try to forge some middle ground.
Going through the mediation committee is a little more formal, and asks for help when one or both parties becomes obstinate. I don't see mediation of a particular case as a committee effort, but as the work of one person who has drawn that assignment. Neither do I see mediators as "super-sysops". Any additional "rights" that they may have thereby should be limited to what is needed to maintain confidentiality, and to manage their work load.
I wonder from your post whether you are really talking about the *arbitration* committee.
Asked to resign? Who will take their place?
It would not be a realistic solution.
Not me, oh no siree, I can't be bothered. I work full time and have a life. I usually just delete commments in the mailing list (except Jimbo and this one, which was luckily at the top.) The precious free time I spend on Wikipedia, I add stuff to articles. Am still trying to figure out the inner workings of the Hyundai group...
Many of us are in similar situations. I do so without even spending time worrying about Hyundai.
Of course, the mediation committee should be able to ban users who are not willing to enter into discussion. That goes without saying. This way, if a user ignores the mediation committee, no more w for them.
Giving mediators the right to ban would validate the "super-sysop" charge. Reporting a serious refusal to co-operate would be perfectly acceptable.
Ec
On Sat, 20 Mar 2004, Ray Saintonge wrote:
Giving mediators the right to ban would validate the "super-sysop" charge. Reporting a serious refusal to co-operate would be perfectly acceptable.
Heck, I'm still accessing the Internet from a dialup connection -- & I have to share the single phone line with my wife (who plays card games for hours on Yahoo). Most days I don't feel as if I'm even a full sysop -- no matter how many privileges I might be granted on Wikipedia!
Geoff
On Sun, 2004-03-21 at 02:34, A [name omitted for privacy reasons] wrote:
The mediation committee has refused to mediate in any circumstance or issue for which I am a participant.
Firstly, it should be noted that this sentence is factually accurate.
But so was the memorable claim by William Clinton:
"I did not have 'sexual relations' with that _woman_... ,Monica Lewinsky!"
The problem with _your_ claim is not the word "is". Rather I would emphasize the significate functions of the words "any" and "refuse" in your claim.
Specifically, I would point out that you have not raised "any" "circumstance" or "issue" on which you would like mediation, and thus "refusal" is the only option open to any and all mediators past, present or future. Should you wish to remedy that state, I am confident that refusal will not subsist.
What is the point of this committee, if it refuses to even attempt mediation with some of the supposedly more "mediationally-challenged" users?
Absolutely none. How happy a circumstance then, that this state of affairs does not obtain!
I think everyone on the mediation committee should be asked to resign, so that we can get some users who actually want to mediate and facilitate discussion.
Here, I would suggest that you start small; try to impeach a specific mediator. Like me, for instance.
It seems clear to me that these people only took the position because they saw it as a way of becoming "super-sysops" -- not because they really wanted to undertake the effort of mediation.
Your perspicacity is awe-inspiring. For myself, I never have had _any_ wish to "undertake the effort of mediation". What I _do_ have, is the wish to do _anything_ that will aid in improving the way that Wikipedia functions.
Respectfully (barely),
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
A [name omitted for privacy reasons] a écrit:
The mediation committee has refused to mediate in any circumstance or issue for which I am a participant. What is the point of this committee, if it refuses to even attempt mediation with some of the supposedly more "mediationally-challenged" users?
I agree you are a mediationally-challenged user, and I agree your problem is one that is more about communication with others, rather than pure arbitration...
So...here is what I basically said to you yesterday
Just as any wikipedian, mediators are all volunteers. They are not paid to do the job. They do that nicely to help people, to help the community, depending on their availability and level of energy. There is no way they are gonna be forced into doing something they do not feel like doing, or have no time to do.
We are not here only for mediation full time. As dedicated as we are, we are also here on Wikipedia to have fun, to write articles just as any editor, to talk with regular people who have no other problem than to fix a poorly utf8 converted article (...), just perhaps to do things that bring us a little bit more satisfaction, so that we can recharge our batteries to serve you better afterwards.
So, give us a break please :-)
A few days ago, Brian Corr suggested he was willing to see your situation.
Now, I must say Lir, you are most welcome to support Brian as a mediator, because Sam is not happy with his candidacy and wishes it to be made invalid. Perhaps, I could suggest you to take yourself your own hand, to head to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_mediation
Then, put your name here (not on the board). And then say "Guys, I am unhappy with my life on Wikipedia. I would like to talk to someone about it. I know there is someone great I really trust, and feel like he is being willing to help me, and that is really great. I would really like that he helps me, I am convinced he will be the most appropriate person to do so and I look forward to our interaction. Please Brian, give me a hand and a bit of your precious time."
Then, try to go to the point. Do not forget he is human and has a life on his own. Try to not exhaust him too quickly, we are not easily renewable natural resources as you seem to think we are :-)
IF NOT
Regarding your request for us to refer you to arbitration, so that arbitrators feel compelled...
As I already said as well, I do not think it is our job to refer people to arbitration. It is either you, or an advocate. I suggest that we would gladly say to arbitration "here is Lir, she is in trouble, please take care of her" But there is no way, we will spent our time to fight for you to have your case made receivable by the committee. Because it is not our job.
So, I suggest you ask yourself, and when you do, I will add a note there, mentionning that we could not find a level of understanding with you.
As for arbitration feeling compelled, well...just as well, these guys are voluntaries. They also have a life on their own. On top of this, currently,the one referring cases is Jimbo. So, do not forget to ask Jimbo directly, or wait till they can take cases themselves.
I think everyone on the mediation committee should be asked to resign, so that we can get some users who actually want to mediate and facilitate discussion. It seems clear to me that these people only took the position because they saw it as a way of becoming "super-sysops" -- not because they really wanted to undertake the effort of mediation.
I also remind that everyone is most welcome to help if he thinks he can, in any dispute. Though wikipedians are clearly more and more specialised in their activity, I think mediation is really something no one should hesitate to do.
As for my "super-sysop" activity, here is what I did this evening (well, it is 7h21 am). * I "super-soothed" my crying daughter after she was punished by her father, and fell asleep in her 120 cm long bed for 3 hours. I feel like a crumble cookie and have a neck pain now. That was my day mediation. By my standards, it was a success since both disputants are now quietly sleeping. * I finally made my "super-recipe". Please visit and feel to dream over my pastilla http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pastilla. Cooking brings a lot of relief for frustration Lir. I recommand to you our recettes du mois for more http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recettes_du_mois * I pestered against the "super-passage" in utf8, that was not entirely successful. Fortunately, our non-entirely expandable resource Brion came to the rescue * I wandered a bit on the DNA, where *you* are in trouble, "super-wondering" as each day, whether I should stay here a bit more, or whether I should just leave you all 5 playing together for the months to come.
Now, "super-anthere" goes to bed :-) Nite Lir