Why? Arbcom largely decides how to handle personality disputes, and in the process must deal somewhat with applications of principle -neutrality being first among them.
It seems to be popular belief that the Arbcom is understaffed relative to Wikipedia size, anyway. As a consequence, it seems to only thinly treat its duty to be treat each specific point/issue/claim, and in turn this means that its rulings offer only a decree, and show little about the thinking process. Of course, things are open to discussion, but IAC, NPOV is clear enough for a committee to deal with regard to its application to certain points, and is separate from personality issues.
Growth often means diversification.
SV
--- Kelly Martin kelly.lynn.martin@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/5/05, steve v vertigosteve@yahoo.com wrote:
Would this "lower court filter" resemble a Wikipedia:NPOV committee?
SV
At this time, I'm opposed to either ArbCom or any body subordinate to it being involved deciding content disputes.
Kelly
__________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com