[WikiEN-l] Fairness in Wikipedia

[charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com]

"Ron Ritzman" wrote 

>I would say that if
> a contributor continues to do "X" after several good faith "please
> don't do X" requests from reasonable people, then that person is no
> longer a "good faith contributor" and any of his contributions with
> "X" in them are not "good faith contributions".
 
> Therefore, Arbcom is not being "unfair" to such a person by ruling against him.

It is rarely so simple.

One of the reasons is that our policies are not drafted by legal professionals. Therefore the assumption that they can be used as the basis of an entirely judicial approach to resolving disputes is flawed from the outset. The policies, for most editors, are a rough indication of what Wikipedia expects in the way of behaviour. That's good enough for most editing.

ArbCom cases are not 'everyday situations' (thank God). They cover all possible variations on editing that transgresses or tries to exploit policy. If someone is working with a misconception of what policy means, or is in effect wikilawyering by sailing very close to the wind, there does come a point at which Arbitrators look at the substantive effect of editor behaviour, not the letter of policy.

Charles

-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam