[Wikimedia-l] ombudsmen commission

James Forrester james at jdforrester.org
Mon Apr 23 17:59:55 UTC 2012

On 23 April 2012 18:56, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 23 April 2012 17:50, Risker <risker.wp at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I am very surprised that it would require going through 600 emails to
>>> find out how many cases the OC has dealt with over the past year. If
>>> they don't have that information somewhere, then they can't have been
>>> doing a good job. There is no way they can do their job properly
>>> without knowing what cases they've received...
>> I don't think your correlation is correct.  Simply because they have not
>> maintained a list of case dispositions (not required or expected to this
>> point, and more particularly very difficult to do when there's no
>> confidential place for them to retain it) does not mean that they have
>> failed to do the job properly.
> How can you make sure you don't forget any cases if you don't keep a
> record of them?

I'm confused. It's trivially obvious that you can keep a record of
what you're working on at a given time without keeping a centralised
overview record based on time periods. In what way is this not clear?

In my experience, the Ombudsmen do excellent work, but I think some
(additional) community reporting is probably a good thing. To echo the
suggestion ^^^^ up-thread, why don't we take this to meta for
discussion about what we want to see from them (and what's reasonable,
of course!)?

James D. Forrester
jdforrester at wikimedia.org | jdforrester at gmail.com
[[Wikipedia:User:Jdforrester|James F.]]

More information about the Wikimedia-l mailing list