[WikiEN-l] Wikiquette "committee"

[Ray Saintonge]

Alex R. wrote:

>I would keep the mediators and arbitrators two distinct
>groups. If you go in front of a mediator and know they
>have been or might be an arbitrator then you may not
>consider them your friend.
>
>Mediation and arbitration are two very different processes.
>Mediation is trying to get people to talk, communicate
>and come to some kind of compromise. Mediators allow
>people to take any position they want and then they try
>to have the parties see the position of the other side to
>appreciate it and see if there is any merit in the other side's
>POV. It is really a lot like the NPOV process we encourage
>here.
>
>An arbitratror (from ancient Roman origins) is a neutral decision
>maker who looks at the differentPOVs and tries to find the
>proper interpretation of the parties differing POVs to find
>the controlling opnion in terms of rules and events and
>the interpretation of those rules in relation to the events.
>While the arbitrator (or arbitration committee) must only
>come to one opinion it may not even be the opinions of
>the parties, they may decide on a third opinion. Also the
>parties going into arbitration basically agree that whatever
>decision the arbitrator comes to will be binding on both
>of them. Thus they are giving up their particular position
>in an appeal to the impartiality of the arbitration process.
>
>You can't talk to an arbitrator the way you talk to a mediator.
> Also the arbitration process is open to some scrutiny 
>(though it may not be public as in a court because it is done 
>by the consent of the parties not through the coersion of
> the state). Mediation cannot really work unless it is 
>confidential and the parties do not fear a penalty for 
>somehow failing in the mediation process.
>
>Sorry for goiing on but these are two incredibly complex
>processes that have very long histories and many 
>different types of manifestation in the behavior of
>groups of people so it is very difficult to take all the
>knowledge I have about these two processes and
>condence them down into layperson nutshells. Please
>excuse my verbosity!
>
Compared to some of your previous legal explanations, this one was 
remarkably succinct. :-)

Ec