[WikiEN-l] Arbitration progress report #2

[Sean Barrett]

> A couple of current Jurisdiction issues:
> 
> * What sorts of disputes should the arbitration committee hear? Article disputes? 
> Wikiquette disputes? Copyright/Legal/Election disputes?

I prefer a narrow jurisdiction: I don't want to be asked to decide if
Usama bin Laden is a terrorist, or even if DNA is a nucleic acid.
Rudeness isn't a crime and I don't think our time should be wasted
with "mommy, he called me a Nazi!" or even "mommy, he called himself a
Nazi!" whin(g)ing.  I can see us arbiting non-obvious copyright and
legal questions, but if by "election disputes" you mean "mommy, he
voted twice!" I feel that the person who set up the election needs to
resolve any conflicts.

> * Should we always require mediation, generally prefer mediation (with exceptions), 
> or not require mediation?

I prefer flexibility; ie, prefer mediation but allow exceptions on a
case-by-case basis.

Unless that's a typo.  I think that even if we don't now, we soon will
require medication.

-- 
 Sean Barrett     | My favorite kind of force is sheer force.
 sean at epoptic.com |