[WikiEN-l] Arbitration Committee elections, 2005

[David Gerard]

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.


:-)

One of the things the AC has been doing this year, to fill gaps as
they come up, is to actively look around the wiki for sufficiently
clueful people to recruit to the AC. This is harder than you might
think, because a lot of the best prospects for the job fairly sensibly
run screaming from the idea. But we have ways and means to convince
them ;-)

Job requirements, off the top of my head ...

* Analytical skill
* Empathy
* The synergy of the two (which is a different thing from either individually)
* An excellent feel for the community; knowing how to deal with
expectations, which are much more hazardous to break than mere policy
* Consistent free time to put into important but often tedious and
depressing work
* Enough political skill on the wiki to convince people you have enough clue

What else?


- d.