[WikiEN-l] the mediation committe is a failure

[Ray Saintonge]

Christopher Mahan wrote:

>--- A [name omitted for privacy reasons] <wikilir at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>The mediation committee has refused to mediate in any
>>circumstance or issue for which I am a participant.
>>What is the point of this committee, if it refuses to
>>even attempt mediation with some of the supposedly
>>more "mediationally-challenged" users? 
>>
>>I think everyone on the mediation committee should be
>>asked to resign, so that we can get some users who
>>actually want to mediate and facilitate discussion. It
>>seems clear to me that these people only took the
>>position because they saw it as a way of becoming
>>"super-sysops" -- not because they really wanted to
>>undertake the effort of mediation. 
>>
Maybe we just look at mediation in different ways.  Any person that the 
parties will listen to should be able to act as a mediator, and if he 
can find a solution by his informal means the Wikipedia will be the 
richer by that.  Hopefully we can all do that from time to time, as when 
we see an edit war in progress and try to forge some middle ground.

Going through the mediation committee is a little more formal, and asks 
for help when one or both parties becomes obstinate.  I don't see 
mediation of a particular case as a committee effort, but as the work of 
one person who has drawn that assignment.  Neither do I see mediators as 
"super-sysops".  Any additional "rights" that they may have thereby 
should be limited to what is needed to maintain confidentiality, and to 
manage their work load.  

I wonder from your post whether you are really talking about the 
*arbitration* committee.

>Asked to resign? Who will take their place?
>
It would not be a realistic solution.

>Not me, oh no siree, I can't be bothered. I work full time and have a
>life. I usually just delete commments in the mailing list (except
>Jimbo and this one, which was luckily at the top.) The precious free
>time I spend on Wikipedia, I add stuff to articles. Am still trying
>to figure out the inner workings of the Hyundai group...
>
Many of us are in similar situations.  I do so without even spending 
time worrying about Hyundai.

>Of course, the mediation committee should be able to ban users who
>are not willing to enter into discussion. That goes without saying.
>This way, if a user ignores the mediation committee, no more w for them.
>
Giving mediators the right to ban would validate the "super-sysop" 
charge.  Reporting a serious refusal to co-operate would be perfectly 
acceptable.

Ec

>