I completely understand that ArbCom wasn't going to make a content decision (although, I still kinda question why not. If ArbCom is our equivalent of the Supreme Court, they should have this jurisdiction.). It just seems odd to me. ArbCom is our highest level of dispute resolution. So, those in dispute must have went through several other mediums of DR before getting to ArbCom. ArbCom takes the case, and spends a month reviewing evidence and what-not. Then, they come back with a ruling and that ruling is to urging the editors to work collaboratively and constructively with the community and implement an acceptable approach to resolving content dispute (paraphrase of actual ruling). Obviously, they are unable to do this and that's why its failed a couple previous rounds of dispute resolution. Just seems off to me. By the time a case gets to ArbCom, all matters of negotiations have failed. I don't even know what I expected ArbCom to do, it just seems like a lot of wasted time for an impotent ruling.
-----Original Message----- From: wikien-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Nathan Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 11:40 AM To: English Wikipedia Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] WP:EPISODE
That is actually not all that uncommon for these types of situations - similar things happen in nationalism disputes. Rather than making the difficult content dispute decisions (which isn't their place) they admonish editors to work constructively and sometimes address conduct issues if necessary.
They didn't accept this case to deal with the underlying content dispute, and the decision principles cover the conduct that was objectionable which was the basis of 'cert' here.
Generally, there is no need to pause attempts to build consensus in a content dispute during an ArbCom case, as long as it is done without exacerbating the conduct and policy issues being addressed by Arbs.
On Dec 28, 2007 12:28 PM, Majdan, Nik nmajdan@aplmc.com wrote:
Just FYI for everyone, this ArbCom case has closed:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Episodes
_and_characters
I don't follow ArbCom cases too much but was following this one as a frequent editor of the Scrubs TV series articles. I was surprised at
the
lack of an apparent decision in this one. As I stated in AN, telling
the
editors to "work collaboratively and constructively with the broader community" seems ridiculous to me. The case made its way to ArbCom because the editors were unable to do exactly that. Granted, ArbCom doesn't get into content disputes, but telling users to work together who obviously can't seems counterproductive to me. There was a reason
it
went to ArbCom in the first place.
_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may constitute as attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, notify us immediately by telephone and (i) destroy this message if a facsimile or (ii) delete this message immediately if this is an electronic communication.
Thank you.