Ray Saintonge wrote:
Fred Bauder wrote:
The arbitrators cannot decide any dispute that is not submitted to us, but I think our jurisdiction should include disputes over content in appropriate instances, for example, where repeated struggles to produce a NPOV article have failed.
Of course. Arbitrators who are narrowly focused on whether someone should be banned or not would be a waste of human resources. Based on the facts in an actual case, they should have a wide range of possible solutions available to them.
I do see your point somewhat, and might be willing to let arbitrators do things like set up a vote and interpret its results. I'm somewhat opposed, however, to letting an arbitration committee actually arbitrate the content of controversial articles. If something cannot be worked out through mediation and must be put to a vote, I think a vote of the contributors on the talk page is preferable to a vote by a separate committee.
In my view, the arbitration committee should really only be taking over powers previously reserved by Jimbo, which are basically to make decisions on banning and procedural matters. He's never reserved a right to dictate resolutions to content disputes, and I don't think the new committee should either.
-Mark