On 14 March 2011 13:46, Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Having a single person would not work, as people would assume that a single > person may have their own personal biases affecting their judgment. > An elected committee might work, and I do think we should look at empowering > such a committee to remove the right to edit BLPs from editors who > repeatedly abuse it, and at creating the technical means to do so.
An elected committee to deal with editor disputes ... we could call it the Arbitration Committee! Except the arbcom feels it has lost so much community confidence it doesn't even feel it has the power to enforce long-standing fundamental policies: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2011-January/108319.html http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2011-January/108321.html (The context there being that they feel they can't maintain the rule "no personal attacks" even to the admins.) Are you suggesting something like a second, parallel arbcom if the first has finally stalled? - d. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l