[WikiEN-l] Arbcom

[George Herbert]

On 10/14/07, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 14/10/2007, Todd Allen <toddmallen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Why not allow clerks to draft proposals? The arbitrators would still be
> > the only ones allowed to -vote-, of course, but I see no harm in letting
> > a clerk make a suggestion. If it's poor, it'll just get voted against
> > anyway.
>
>
> Anyone can draft proposals - that's what the workshop page is for (and
> to keep idiots occupied somewhere relatively harmless, of course).
> Proposals from known sensible people are more likely to be taken
> notice of, of course.

Actually....

Thinking out to the legal system in the US, I wonder if this is a mistake.

In real courts we make Attorneys (or rarely, a defendant or plaintiff
representing themselves) do the arguing and submitting of briefs and
motions.

The Wikipedia analogy would be changing the system so that anyone who
knows something can present evidence, but the proposals are limited to
experts.

Experts could be "the parties, plus any administrator", or more open
(some senior / experienced non-admins), or more restricted (only
people "authorized by Arbcom" or some such).

The downside of this is that taken to an extreme, it effectively
*requires* that participants get an experienced advocate to help with
the process and motions, which introduces the role that Attorneys play
in real life.  And we're a volunteer organization, so we can't make
someone stand up and argue for someone else's defense.

But it's an idea.


-- 
-george william herbert
george.herbert at gmail.com