bbatsell wrote
If ArbCom really feels that the findings of fact are rock solid, then I think they need to explain why and respond publicly to the numerous complaints raised.
I have had some 'dscussion' of this on my Talk page. Since it instantly seemed to turn into talk about 'mitigation', I wasn't that impressed.
As I've said numerous times, I'm aware of and fully appreciate the amount of private discussion that must have gone into this decision.
Well, Arbitrators are not really in a position to convince others that there is a way of working that does allow the bringing up of doubts and queries. We also cannot really make public the route leading from the facts of the case to the remedies; which is where the main burden of discussion seems actually to lie. If those not on the AC mailing list cannot or will not give us credit for knowing at least as much about the factors involved as anyone else, I doubt arguing about it will do much in that direction. What we are not going to agree to is having other 'trials' of Arbitration cases. Appeal lies to Jimbo - that's it.
As for effects on policy: Arbitration is not meant to affect settled policies at all. Decent arbitration requires the separation of doing what fits a given case, and the setting of precedents: there is therefore no default assumption that the AC operates by precedent.
I don't know when I can protect or even unprotect an article anymore.
The position in general remains for admins as ever was: if you are too involved, get others to help. Page protection is a most sensitive area, because a wiki's charter is to be open.
Charles
----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
And let me add that I really really really like MONGO a lot, and we have been having a very nice chat about some totally unrelated matters of some importance.
I think MONGO's supporters are rather missing the point that MONGO himself seems mostly comfortable with the situation.
I reckon MONGO will take a rest for a few months and come back as an admin. When he does, I will almost certainly take the very very rare step of actually voting yes to support his adminship.
--Jimbo
On 12/17/06, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
And let me add that I really really really like MONGO a lot, and we have been having a very nice chat about some totally unrelated matters of some importance.
I think MONGO's supporters are rather missing the point that MONGO himself seems mostly comfortable with the situation.
I reckon MONGO will take a rest for a few months and come back as an admin. When he does, I will almost certainly take the very very rare step of actually voting yes to support his adminship.
--Jimbo _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Don't want to pick hairs with Jimbo here, but isn't that !voting? ;-)
On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 20:57:00 -0500, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
I reckon MONGO will take a rest for a few months and come back as an admin. When he does, I will almost certainly take the very very rare step of actually voting yes to support his adminship.
This is my hope, too. We (he fellow admins) failed him, I think, in not providing adequate support and not checking him earlier. It is unfortunate that the previous ArbCom case re MONGO did not adequately express the concerns which were obviously felt back then, but I can understand why that might have been the case - we do not want ArbCom to give succour to trolls. I am very much more comfortable with the decision now it has been bolstered with a more detailed discussion of the evidence.
A lot of us feel MONGO was hung out to dry, but I suspect that many, maybe most, will acknowledge that the result of the case was both fair and consistent with other similar cases. As I say, the real failure was that it ever got to that stage. Having got there, the result was probably inevitable.
Guy (JzG)