Okay. I an committed. I will post this.
First off. The whole situation about the mediation committee has two/three nasty connotations.
There is an advertisement with a dog that says: "Do as we like, or the dog dies!"
I (personally) think that the mediation committee is under a similar threat, and for similar reasons.
The truth is that we should not upholdd the mediation committee any longer than it has a practical justification.
The puppy has to catch the rabbit, or off to the butchers with it!!
I personally have no idea why Jimbo qualified me for the mediation committee. Maybe perhaps because to do otherwise would mean that he would have to explain any and all other similar decicions.
I know Angela and Stevertigo from the process of bringing up the cleanup process. My own intent was to improve the process of wikipedia in a manner that would remain an improvement, rather than a shackle on its further developement. I hope I can restrain myself into not playing any part in its further developement.
Geoff (llwyrch) I know not at all.
Sannse (did I misspell the username?) I know even less, except a vague, and I must claim irrelevant impression (no justification, please lambast me if it is crappy; I will be the last person to require definitive determination) that she is a female.
Uncle Ed; I personally do not trust, even though I have seen his actions and speech on this forum. To me he is much like I see myself; an unsolved equation, maybe negative, maybe positive, maybe the very zero point of the equation...
Anthere: I would be much more comfortable about contributing in the meditiation group, if you were not a member of it!
PLEASE anthere, think long before getting offended by the previous sentence! I think you can perform a valuable part in forming the limitations of the mediation group, but I honestly don't see that you can offer anything positive to it's developement as a member of it.
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen (aka Cimon Avaro)