Carbonite wrote:
I agree with Tony that it would be difficult to sustain a very large number of arbitrators. However, if we had an efficient system for replacing arbitrators, I could see maintaining a "steady state" of 25-35. Replacements could be appointed by Jimbo, be elected as alternates during the regular ArbCom elections or we could utilize a system like the one suggested by Dragons's Flight.
At present we have the election, then people drop out, then Jimbo drafts people to cover until December. So far the draftees have been appointed following detailed thought and discussion amongst the existing and previous AC on the AC mailing list (which contains all present AC and any past AC who want to be on it.) About half shudder in horror and say "No thank you!" which doesn't surprise me. I'm not sure it's a sustainable method in the long run. Also, en: is far too big for us to know everyone even a bit.
(This may create worries of cabalism amongst the AC. Let me assure you, speaking from the view inside the sausage factory, that the AC members frequently agree on things even less than admins do. Oh boy. But we do respect each others' general cluefulness.)
- d.