[Foundation-l] Meta-arbcom (was: the foundations of...)

effe iets anders effeietsanders at gmail.com
Fri Jan 4 21:27:05 UTC 2008


OK, let's change the subject here, as I think this deserves a seperate thread.

I agree with Thomas that no responsibilities have been determined yet.

However, let me please make clear that I absolutely disagree with the
idea to have "representatives" of local arbcoms in the meta-arbcom.
Not in any case. Why? Well, because this meta-arbcom would in any case
mainly be dealing with small projects and cases that are
multi-project. Other then expertise these local arbcoms have nothing
to bring in. I think that for the sake of neutrality it would even be
better to not have local arbcommers in the meta-arbcom. It's either
another, either a higher jurisdiction. In neither of the cases it
would be wishful to have local arbcom people in the meta-arbcom.

Please let us not get stuck in details here by the way. The language
is mere a practical issue that the arbcom will have to solve on
itself. I think however that for practical reasons language sections
would not be successful. It is not scalable. You can't get 280
language sections, or we should hire language-miracles here, but I
think they can spend their time much better writing travel guides ;-)

Best regards,

Lodewijk

2008/1/4, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton op gmail.com>:
> > I am not sure I quite agree. The local arbitrators on say the Portuguese
> > wikipedia might not have been chosen for their familiarity with minor
> > languages in the (former and current) Portuguese colonies, just as an
> > example, which a putative meta arbcom team with a working language
> > of Portuguese, might quite easily be.
>
> I guess that all depends on what responsibilities the meta-arbcom
> would have, which I don't think has been decided on. If it's primarily
> arbitrating disputes (as the name would suggest), the skills needed
> are much the same regardless of the nature of the dispute.
>
> > I don't quite see how a pure english language meta-arbcom would be
> > truer.
>
> It wouldn't be an English Language arbcom, it would an arbcom that
> uses English as a lingua franca. That's the only way to allow people
> from different languages to work together to resolve issues, which I
> think would be a good feature of a central arbcom.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l op lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



More information about the foundation-l mailing list