[WikiEN-l] Mediation for 172 and VeryVerily (was Re: Yes, it is a lynch mob)

[Michael Snow]

In the spirit of toning down the debate, I've changed the subject 
heading again.

Anthere wrote:

> May I asked why no one is considering mediation ? 

Because it was suggested and considered several times, and the idea 
consistently met with skepticism and rejection or was simply ignored.

When I started the third quickpoll for 172 and VeryVerily, my proposed 
remedy was a request for mediation. I would have requested arbitration 
instead, but concluded the case wasn't ready for arbitration at that 
point because other possibilities like mediation hadn't been tried yet. 
This quickpoll even had the 80% support required for implementing a 
quickpoll remedy, until members of the mediation committee showed up and 
objected to the idea of forcing people into mediation. (I'm not saying 
the mediators don't have a valid point there, just pointing out that the 
community already recognized the need for mediation in this case long ago.)

When VeryVerily and 172 continued their dispute, I asked them directly 
to consider mediation. They responded with skepticism, so I tried to 
address their concerns about the mediation process, but I was never able 
to get either of them to say directly that they'd be willing to try 
mediation. Instead, they either put off considering mediation, ignored 
the idea, or dismissed it altogether. Meanwhile, the dispute went on 
unabated.

So mediation has been considered here, but to no avail, because mostly 
it's been considered by people who don't matter. You and I can consider 
mediation all we want, but it won't do any good - VeryVerily and 172 are 
the ones who control whether mediation can be successful here. Since 
they couldn't manage to resolve their differences by themselves, I think 
the only option we have left is arbitration.

> I think it was meant to help these types of cases ? 

It certainly could have helped, if anybody could have convinced 
VeryVerily and 172 to try it. They are still welcome to go into 
mediation, as the votes by the arbitrators on accepting this case have 
indicated.

> Actually, I even think at least "discussing" mediation possibility was 
> a mandatory step in dispute resolution ? 

If you haven't checked [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution]] lately, you 
might not realize that the process is no longer described as a sequence 
of steps to be followed in a prescribed order. Mediation is not 
mandatory, and it is not a prerequisite to arbitration. However, because 
arbitration is a last resort, other means of dispute resolution should 
be tried first. Also, the arbitration policy specifically provides for 
referrals to and from the mediation committee. In this case, efforts 
were made to get 172 and VeryVerily to participate in mediation; these 
efforts simply never reached the point of actually making a request for 
involvement by the mediation committee.

--Michael Snow