Jimbo recently asked those on the arbitration mailing list (current
and former arbitrators) to give him feedback regarding the listed
candidates. This was done. If someone wants to be considered they
should probably list themselves and also contact an arbitrator and
ask that their availability be forwarded to the list.
Jimbo will probably appoint a list which will have to be confirmed by
the community, probably with a vote of more than 50% approval for
each candidate.
Fred
On Nov 28, 2005, at 11:45 AM, Chris Jenkinson wrote:
Hi all,
It's been one month since Jimbo Wales edited the Arbitration
Committee elections page for this December (now just a few days
away) to change the procedure, adding some brainstormed thoughts.
Those thoughts are still all the information we have on the
procedure, and we're almost in December.
A number of potential candidates have said they don't wish to put
their name forwards if they don't know the election procedure, yet
recently a member of the current Arbitration Committee said that
all Wikipedians wishing to become arbitrators should put their name
forwards immediately.
This is really a terrible state of affairs for a number of reasons:
Firstly, we have no idea how the new Arbitration Committee is going
to become the new Arbitration Committee at all. Not even the
current arbitrators say they know how it's going to be done.
Secondly, it has been almost a year since the last elections, and
there has been plenty of community discussion about what was good
and bad about the procedure, and action has been taken on this by
the community (for example, the deletion of the endorsements/
disendorsements page).
Thirdly, Jimbo has been deathly quiet. These are probably the most
important positions in the Wikipedia community and the process
deserves to be discussed openly. Yet all we've seen are some brief
thoughts from Jimbo. He hasn't responded to other suggestions or to
criticism of his thinking.
Come on Jimbo, sort it out! It's been almost a year since the last
elections, there has been plenty of discussion from the community
(including the current arbitrators) on reform of the system, but
all we've heard from you is a "current line of thinking". Yes, we
know you have other things to do, such as the incredibly important
role of getting funding. However, the encyclopaedia project relies
on its community to exist and we have to get this right. Please
join in the discussion and make your thoughts clear.
Chris
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l