On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 23:22:43 UTC, Delirium
<delirium(a)rufus.d2g.com> wrote:
Having some sort of grandiose process I'm afraid
will actually encourage
the overuse of the committee, as it makes it seem like it's normal to
refer matters to be decided through this process. I think instead the
arbitration committee should be a "decision-making committee of last
resort", to which only relatively extraordinary matters are referred.
And so we could have a relatively minimalistic process: the committee
just votes, and thereby makes a decision (including possibly making the
decision "the committee declines to make a ruling on this matter").
This is probably a good idea; really, I'm not arguing for an elaborate
procedure, but reacting to what seems to be becoming one. But why call it
arbitration? "Committee of last resort" is a fine, descriptive name.
Even the arbitration clauses in the agreements for brokerage and
credit-card accounts (unconscionable because they are imposed by force and
not in a genuine agreement, but that's another issue) give the aggrieved
some power of selecting among the industry's pre-selected arbitrators to
hear their case. As an organization that's charged with preserving
Wilipedia's values (a good thing), "judges" would be a good term; but
Committee of Last Resort, if a little verbose, would be best of all.