[WikiEN-l] Arbcom

[charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com]

"Thomas Dalton" wrote

> On 14/10/2007, charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com
> <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > "Sam Blacketer"
> >
> > > The key problem is the temporary absence of active arbitrators. The
> > > arbitrators are presumably unwilling to resign and lose their place
> > > entirely.
> >
> > As far as I can see, the ArbCom has always burned out Arbitrators at a rate of about one every six weeks. Matters are not going to be improved by unseating them and not allowing them to return if they get a second wind.
> 
> Which is exactly why that's not what he suggested...

The key problems, in fact, are these:

- cases getting harder
- innovation in remedies is no longer solving things
- AC tending to be split, which is what leads to the longest delays
- tendency now to delay closures for just one point, i.e. perfectionism in an imperfect system
- entrenched issues on the site such as COI that would justify a less patient, non-judicial approach
- also, matters that really require executive action being sent to the AC, where they can swamp other discussion
- the volume of informal appeals sent to the AC list
- Arbs also operating Oversight (very active now) and CheckUser functions

These are the new factors. The old factors are fairly well known.

Charles

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