[WikiEN-l] Dispute resolution mailing list

[Carcharoth]

On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 8:13 PM, stevertigo<stvrtg at gmail.com> wrote:

<snip>

> Good point, Emily. Ironically enough though, Arbcom itself doesn't
> participate much in openly discussing its cases. Strange isn't it?

If you catch us in a good mood, maybe. :-)

[I'm currently one of those arbitrators, if that's a bit cryptic for some.]

More seriously, if you find the right venue and present a good case
that something needs discussion or clarification, even after a case is
closed, you stand a good chance of getting a reasonable level of
responses eventually. The main problem, as those who are current
arbitrators and those who were former arbitrators, should be able to
attest, is time and the amount of stuff to deal with. Some of it is
pure overload, other bits are time-management (some of us deal with
simple or interesting stuff first, before tackling the difficult stuff
- it's human nature really).

One of the things that has been suggested, is reviews of cases after
the dust has settled. Not returning to the old discussions, but seeing
how effective the remedies have been, and looking at the enforcement
of cases, and whether the articles involved (if the case involved
articles) have improved at all. Another aspect of review would be
whether any of the policy-related stuff suggested by ArbCom principles
would gain community consensus  to be incorporated into polices.
Technically, the principles should be interpreting existing policies,
but sometimes ArbCom does strongly suggest that change is needed in a
certain area. Whether that happens or not, as Fred points out, depends
on the resulting community discussions. In some cases, though, those
community discussions don't actually take place, and six-month reviews
could point this out.

Eh. I seem to have six-month reviews on the brain for some reason.

Carcharoth