[WikiEN-l] Arbcom

[Kirill Lokshin]

On 10/14/07, Thatcher131 Wikipedia <thatcher131 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/14/07, fredbaud at waterwiki.info <fredbaud at waterwiki.info> wrote:
> > I made one suggestion, which might not be particularly workable.
> Regardless, we need to find solutions.
> >
> > Fred
> >
>
> I had an idea a while ago, I don't remember if I ever presented it before.
>
> Why not have cases heard before a panel of 5 Arbitrators, randomly
> chosen from the list of Arbitrators active when the case was accepted?
> Cases that are voted out 5-0 or 4-1 would close as is; cases where
> the votes were 3-2 or less would be heard before the entire committee.
> That way, Arbitrators do not have to hear every case, and might not
> burn out as quickly. (A vote of 5-0 is all most cases get by the Fall
> of the year anyway.)


It would be *more* susceptible to burnout than the current model, actually,
since there's no provision for the scenario where none of the five
randomly-selected arbitrators are willing to do any case work.  In a system
where the full Committee hears every case, a few active members can keep
things moving (to some degree) even if the bulk of the Committee isn't
actively participating.

(Or, in other words: we can currently close a 5-0 case if we find *any* five
active arbs, but, in the new model, we would select five arbs first and then
expect them to be active -- which is a rather dangerous assumption to make.)

Kirill