[WikiEN-l] Re: DNA, mediation AND arbitration

[Anthere]

Follow up to DNA conflict, I

* unprotected the DNA page to avoid it staying unavailable for too many 
months

* the first two paragraphs (the disputed part) are virtually protected.

* any edit made to the first two paragraphs will be reverted. The rest 
of the article is free for edition

* any edit made to the first two paragraphs will get the user soft 
banned (unless typo correction or similar move)

* if the user is a sysop and unban himself, it will be listed as sysop abuse

* I suggested to restart the discussion and individual propositions all 
over again. I do not think a majority vote has any value on an article 
page to the point a strong veto given by one of the main author may be 
just neglected. I don't think a couple of people repeating ad nauseam 
that this is the most approved version so the "right" one, while the 
vetoer reverts it on sight, is the right path for consensus decision 
making. Veto is something recognised in consensus.

* I suggest that, any user interested by the topic, tries to give a 
version or two that he would approved (and refrain from listing the 
allegably majority approved one, since this one is vetoed anyway) and 
try to do this in all independance of mind (ie, trying not to suit one 
or the other of the disputants deliberatly)

* I hope that when each participants has given one personal proposition, 
he will make effort to create other version from merging his and 
versions by other participants

* When some solutions are worked out, I suggest that all propositions 
are listed and that a vote takes place again. The voters may *only* be 
those who "participated" in the discussion and "proposed versions". 
Other votes will be removed. Those people late in the discussion will 
have the opportunity to participate in the next vote session. I will 
look for potential participants to the current discussion.

* No voluntary participation to that discussion and propositions, will 
signify the person is not interested in its outcome. This person will 
not be granted the right to revert the subsequent change that will be 
decided upon (in other words, if someone does not give propositions, and 
discuss with the others, does not participate to the vote, let a 
decision be taken without saying anything, then this user will not be 
granted the right to revert the article later on. Any reversion will 
grant a *ban* on this article).

* The vote will be in such a way, that any vote strongly against will 
remove the option from the list. Yes, I know it makes it more likely 
that no solution is found. Perhaps will that motivate people to try to 
find an acceptable solution for all

* Either people find an agreement, or these first paragraphs will stay 
uneditable for the months to come. I might even consider a rotation of 
the version every couple of weeks, so that no one version is prefered.

* The IP user who edited the first two paragraphs of the article will be 
automatically unbanned in about 23 hours.

* Any discussion over arbitration in Mav and 168 conflict is in Jimbo 
hands. Any discussion over further unsysoping or softbanning or hard 
banning of 168 or Lir, is to take place in other places than the current 
DNA talk page. I will remove any personal attack from that page.

* I changed my nick. I switched from sweetlittlefluffything to 
firmlittlefluffything