[WikiEN-l] Re: Arbitration Committee term lengths

[Michael Snow]

Angela wrote:

>I don't think three years is excessive. It might seem a long time
>since Wikipedia is a relatively young project
>
It seems like a long time not just because Wikipedia is young, but 
because realistically, it is a very long-term commitment relatively to 
the contributing lifespan of quite a few Wikipedians. Turnover and 
attrition will happen among arbitrators as well.

>but the experience
>which arbitrators will build up during that three year period will be
>invaluable in assisting them in making good decisions.
>  
>
Sure, IFF they are actually developing experience in the arbitration 
process during that period.

The combination of these factors leads me to conclude that the issue is 
not with the three-year term per se, but that arbitrators need to 
recognize whether they are serving effectively and be prepared to step 
aside if not, even if it's before their term ends. I think there is an 
obvious problem when an arbitrator who has not really been active in the 
process at all still has two years left to serve, and based on the past 
year there is no reason to seriously expect this arbitrator to begin 
participating. No experience is being gained by anyone that way.

If arbitrators resign responsibly when they recognize that they won't be 
able to serve effectively, they can be replaced and the process will 
function more smoothly. I commend Martin and Camembert for taking this 
step. In many systems, elected officials may resign before the ends of 
their terms, and a mechanism is available to replace them. We did this 
earlier this year with Jwrosenzweig and Raul654.

I understand that going through election cycles too often can be a 
little draining. To be honest, I don't care that much whether interim 
appointments are handled by special election. I would be fine with 
letting the Board of Trustees appoint interim arbitrators, and just 
adding these positions to the regular election at the end of the year.

This is similar to the model in my own local jurisdiction. We have 
elected judges, but frequently there are mid-term vacancies (resulting 
from resignations due to retirement, advancement, other career 
opportunities, and occasionally death). Such vacancies are filled 
through appointment by the executive branch of government, until the 
next election. I haven't observed any significant problems with this 
system, unless you simply have philosophical concerns about whether 
judges should be elected at all.

--Michael Snow