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

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
When relatively irrelevant things are discussed I switch off. What is of
relevance to me is that a global arbitration com is about meta
considerations. I do not care for individual people complaining about
whatever. What is of relevance to me is how to deal with PROJECTS that are
considered to be problematic. How we are to define where the self
determination of projects stops and where global values take precedence.
When an arbcom is dealing with that, I am very eager to see this happen.
When it does not deal with this, it is for me mostly a waste of time and
effort.
Thanks,
    Gerard

On Jan 5, 2008 7:49 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 05/01/2008, effe iets anders <effeietsanders at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Guys, please,
> >
> > The language is just a mere practical matter. Please let's first come
> > to the conclusion what the *purpose* would be of this meta-arbcom
> > *before* we even start with discussing issues like this. i know it is
> > very easy to get into details, but let's remain focussed. Does anyone
> > have a good proposal for which topics the arbcom should be used and
> > what type of members we would need?
>
> It's a practical matter, but I don't think it's a "mere" one. It is a
> very important issue that needs to be resolved. What kind of cases the
> committee will consider is also an important issue, but there's no
> reason we can't discuss them both.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>