Fred Bauder wrote:
I suggest you submit names to Jimbo with a basis for why you think they would be a good arbitrator. That is basically all we do. If we all agree on one person (remember we often disagree) he is likely to seriously consider the person. If a person is making a lot of trouble already we are not likely to think they are good candidates, but personally I am a little concerned that what makes a good arbitrator is not all that predictable.
By the way, anyone who thinks they can contribute to arbitration is welcome to make proposal on the /Workshop page of any arbitration case. I know I'll be looking for talent there. Rumor has it that there might be a small reward for any of the Wikipedia advocates should any of their work on /Workshop be used in a decision by the Arbitration Committee.
Fred
On Oct 25, 2005, at 6:29 PM, Jack Lynch wrote:
I think its pretty obvious most people disagree w Jimbo's decision. Allowing current arbiters to be involved in selecting new arbiters strikes me as a particularly ill omen. Additionally, people like myself with almost no contact w Jimbo directly have little or no chance. How does having Jimbo know who you are make one a better arbiter?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2005
Jack (Sam Spade)
I don't think people should expect a reward for helping out other than knowing that they've helped out and possibly earned the thanks of the arbcom, that being said rewards are always welcome :).
-Jtkiefer