[WikiEN-l] Arbitration Commitee Seeking Comment

[steven l. rubenstein]

Erik Moeller wrote,

>I will state here for the record that I'm strongly opposed to any
>content arbitration committee. Decisions like this should be made by the
>community, not by elected or appointed representatives. The solution to
>dealing with prolonged disputes is to establish clear community
>procedures to make decisions, such as binding votes under clear
>conditions (e.g. a discussion has been going on for X weeks, all
>arguments have been summarized, all options of the vote have been agreed
>upon in consensus ..). Wikipedia does not need an editorial staff.
>
>As I've often stated, if you absolutely rule out voting as a last
>resort, you end up with clubs and cabals which make decisions instead.
>This is exactly what a content committee would eventually become. Don't
>destroy the village in order to save it.

I share Erik's concern about cabals, but I think this is an issue Mav has 
addressed, satisfactorally, at length.  Rotating elected members with 
term-limits, and an appeals process, provide checks and balances.

I fundamentally disagree with Erik about the community vote.  We all come 
to Wikipedia because we offer different things -- some people know a lot 
about the Bible, others about Cricket, others about linux, and so on.  We 
also all come here to learn things we do not know.  I do not really 
understand quantum mechanics -- you really think I should vote on whether 
content is accurate or not?  I do not know the physics literature -- you 
really think I can vote on the repute of a given source?

There are some things I know a great deal about, and will argue my position 
forcefully with anyone -- and can also recognize, easily, when someone 
else's position is better than mine.  This is far from true, however, 
concerning most issues at Wikipedia.  I think what motivates these 
proposals, and Jguk's and Mav's proposals particularly, is the recognition 
that no one here is an expert on everything, and the community needs people 
to turn to for reliable, well-informed evaluations of content and disputes 
over content.  I think this is undeniable.  And a full-community vote, far 
from helping, will make things worse.

Checks, balances, and accountability, yes.  But knowledge and experience, 
yes too.

Steve


Steven L. Rubenstein
Associate Professor
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Bentley Annex
Ohio University
Athens, Ohio 45701