[WikiEN-l] Worthy admins? (was "The userbox fad")

[Anthony DiPierro]

On 1/5/06, Ryan Delaney <ryan.delaney at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/5/06, Garion1000 <garion1000 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Many supreme courts or international courts do work like this though. They
> > consist for instance totally of 10 judges but some cases are just taken up
> > by three of them. I haven't encountered any inconsistencies there.
> > Although
> > I do not know how they solved it. Probably because they have and use a
> > good
> > bureaucratic system.
>
>
> Two points:
>
> (1) WP:ISNOT a bureaucracy. :-) I had to get that out there.
> (2) I'm probably more interested in the lower-court system since I'm from
> the United States and I'm modelling this after the Supremer Court. My main
> point, however, is that while increasing the number of Arbs may improve the
> situation, it couldn't improve the situtation any more than a lower court
> system would also- but the lower court system would have fewer possible
> drawbacks.
>
> Ryan

Regarding number 2, this is how the US appeals courts work.  "In a
court of appeals, an appeal is almost always heard by a "panel" of
three of the court's judges, although there are instances where all of
the judges will participate in an en banc hearing."  [[United States
court of appeals]]

I have no idea what the advantages/disadvantages are supposed to be.

Anthony