[WikiEN-l] Dispute resolution mailing list

[stevertigo]

On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 9:56 AM, Charles Matthews <
charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:

> I see Risker has already asked for a definition of the purpose of such a
> list. My feeling so far is that this is all rather [[Blind men and an
> elephant]]: different people come up with different aspects of dispute
> resolution they think could usefully be discussed on a list.  Such as
> BLP (Fred) or any other policy matters,  or overview of current activity
> (the Signpost already does this for Arbitration). You would undoubtedly
> get advocacy; would you not get canvassing?  Discussion of intractable
> edit wars? What is and is not pseudoscience? Second-guessing appeals and
> clarifications? Speculation about matters in mediation? If it descends
> to "X is a disruptive editor so something should be done" one can expect
> some fairly primitive knockabout.
>
> In my view, the problem needing a solution is to get people with an
> onsite dispute to use the lower tiers of dispute resolution correctly.


In my view, the problem needing a solution is to get people with an
authority
over disputes to make the lower tiers of dispute resolution correct --such
that they be actually usable and that people will innately know how to "use
them.. correctly."
It is the *customer that is always right, Charles. Not the vendor.

CM: "Blind men and an elephant.. different people come up with different
aspects of dispute resolution they think could usefully be discussed on a
list" - This is exactly how mailing list technology works.

 CM: "You would undoubtedly get advocacy; would you not get canvassing?
Discussion of intractable edit wars? What is and is not pseudoscience?
Second-guessing appeals and clarifications?  Speculation about matters in
mediation?"

AGF and NOT generally answer these as well. But again, as with other stated
concerns, I do not see what value there is in being afraid of what may be
said by someone. People are intelligent enough to deal with whatever comes
up, and no amount of pre-programming is going to substitute for
intelligence.

CM: "If it descends to "X is a disruptive editor so something should be
done" one can expect some fairly primitive knockabout."

Is primitive knockabout any worse or better than organized and modernistic
knockabout?

-Stevertigo