I think theres one issue that your missing here with mediation - Most parties that get to the point of arbitration have no desire to allow mediators to get involved, and have no desire to even consider discussing the situation. ----- Original Message ----- From: "MacGyverMagic/Mgm" macgyvermagic@gmail.com To: "Rebecca" misfitgirl@gmail.com; "English Wikipedia" wikien-l@wikipedia.org Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 5:06 PM Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Arbitration Commitee Seeking Comment
Now you're talking. I think this would solve one half of the problem, by getting in early - though I still think mediators could do with a bit of help learning some skills.
-- ambi
Yes, mediators definitely need to get in earlier. And it might be a good idea to allow for multi-party mediation if there's 2 distinct viewpoints being argued.
Also, it was mentioned earlier that Wikipedia as a written medium isn't the optimal place for mediation. I tend to disagree. The most important aspect - the mediator "forcing" the parties to get to the bottom (and therefore the real issues) of their disagreement - should still work just as well as collaborative editing does. Collaborative editing may not be as effective as face-to-face teamwork, but it still works. And I believe that mediation, if performed before things escalate could work just as well.
--Mgm _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l