On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 14:46:47 +1100, Rebecca <misfitgirl(a)gmail.com> wrote: I agree. Jwrosenzweig is the best possible person I can think of for the job, whether it's as a new permanent chair or an interim one. ~blankfaze

I boldly added two of the most supported ones. It is not so obvious to me whether the other candidates should be added or not added. Quizz : who are the two last approved mediators ? :-) Anthere Rebecca a écrit:

I am glad there is a candidate to follow-up. Since there was no opposition to you as a candidate, I added you to the mediator list. I opened a paragraph for the chair election and listed you as a candidate. I advertised this on the pump, and you advertised yourself here, so I guess it is enough. If there is no serious opposition or serious other candidates, just consider yourself the chair of the MC and let's move ahead :-) ------- As for your question : is there another place to discuss all this ? The answer is no. After the creation of the MC last year, most of the discussion was done by email between members. A lot was said, but since it was private, there is no way for you to find it back. Well, as far as I remember, I wrote a lot on the topic during two months, and in front of the lack of responses from about half of the members, I just basically gave up. Later, a board website was set. I copied there a lot of the discussions we hold privately or I tried to summarize. It took me a lot of time as well to do this. Later the board was closed and all discussions were thus lost. If you ask me my opinion on this, several months later, I still have not digested this at all. I think the mediation committee was about half of my daily activity on Wikipedia for about a full trimester. Most was private since mediation is a private activity. The part public has been deleted. The results of mediation done through the mediation committee were frankly limited. (however, this does not diminish the satisfaction of solving daily crisis when made aware of). All this is still a bit in my throat and my activity as a part of the mediation committee is the role which left me sour taste in my mouth for several other reasons that the ones mentionned above as well. Why do I say this ? Well, just for you to be aware that mediator is a tough activity. Essentially unrecognised one. Lonely. If there is any sign to support what I say, it is enough to see the level of implication of each mediator, as well as resignations, and very likely the number of mediators who left for the AC. I do not say it is hopeless, far from it, because I *highly believe* in mediation, much more than strict arbitration, and I really hope you help it. I only wish that as a chair, you also help building up a team. Note that my own experience is not a criticism of previous chairs, as I was mostly active before we had any chair at all. ------ Note that private mails are still sent now and then. And the big mess is that we have to put people names in the cc, and likely forget names or add names that should not be there. I *highly* suggest you create a mediation-l(a)wikimedia.org (or similar) either public list, or just a list of members (redirect to their address), so that one writes to the right people. If you do so, just tell the developer you ask the mail address that it is okay with me to create such a thing :-) (in case they ask) You have my full support in any cases Anthere ------- James Rosenzweig a écrit: