I'm afraid Jimbo that is not my experience of the Arbcom, I regard them as
spiteful and vengeful, not qualities needed in an Arb. More interested in
maintaining their own status quo than in the encyclopedia. In my
opinion many of them need replacing, and even more of them removing from the
Arb's mailing list.
Giano
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 11:20 PM, Jimmy Wales <jwales(a)wikia.com> wrote:
White Cat wrote:
Arbcom takes a lot of time to make quick and rash
decisions. You hardly
see
extensive discussions by arbitrators on workshops
or proposed decisions
anymore
In my experience, this is not true. If there are real problems, then
please bring me a specific detailed case in which the ArbCom really got
something badly wrong. There is an appeal mechanism, after all. And in
my experience, the ArbCom is eager to correct errors, examine everything
to see where the evidence leads, etc.
Not all the work is public, and for good reason. There are frank and
thoughtful discussions about how to best defuse difficult situations, etc.
--Jimbo
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l