[WikiEN-l] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

[stevertigo]

On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Charles
Matthews<charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Oh, have it your own way, then. It just looked, superficially, as if you
> were dead set on alienating large numbers of people, spamming lists,
> creating personal frictions and all that.

I understand that I have a created a special niche for myself here. I
also understand exactly what most concerns and troubles the
bureaucratic mindset. But note that none of this "spamming" would have
been necessary back in Jimbo's day - when anything came up he did his
best to give straight and insightful answers to almost anyone.

> The thing is, if you are going to call up the "old days" precedents,
> then it will not do to invoke a partial and sepia-tinted version. There
> are several things we (I'm also an old-school Wikipedian) worked out
> then, including the idea that "Wikipedia is not a battleground". There
> are certainly people who continue to act as if it is.

Excellent points, sir. But how would opening up and centralizing one
small aspect of dispute resolution - dedicated discussion of DR itself
- decrease the peace in any way?

>  It is all very well to get worked up about glasnost' issues - we saw a lot of that in
> the last election.

I know nothing of the last election - I only get involved in these
things when I think that things have become too obviously warped for
anyone else to deal with. If you could give us a little of your own
project historian overview of what you are talking about - just for
the record - that would be rather interesting too.

> A rolling manifesto of abusing anyone connected with
> Arbitration is not actually any kind of solution to anything.

The fact remains that dispute resolution functions need to be more
open. If Arbcom and perhaps even Foundation (hm) actually functioned
fully in accord with their own stated principles or values, then there
would be no issue with concepts like transparency. Because there is an
issue, and because I long ago rejected the concept of being a mere
functionary, I am raising the point now - such that the matter gets
dealt with. Matters eventually do get dealt with.

After that, I will go back to whatever the hell it is I do around here.

> What you seekt to do might very well be achieved by some forum
> unconnected to Wikipedia in any official sense.

I consulted with Uncyclopedia, but they just laughed.
Was that the kind of disconnected and disjointed forum you were referring to?

-Stevertigo