Recently a Wikipedia editor e-mailed me regarding concerns she had about the
ArbCom process. In particular, she was looking at an ArbCom case brought up
against an editor who (aside from a couple of articles) has added little in
the way of actual content, copyedits, or housekeeping to the project, but
who has long been noted for personal attacks, trolling, edit-warring, and
who has been temp-banned more than once. As seems to be typical in these
cases, the person being brought before ArbCom created a "counter
arbitration" defense against one complainant in particular (a long time
contributer of much valued content, though perhaps given to getting a little
personal in disputes). As a matter of policy, the behaviour of those who
were bringing the complaint was examined with equal intensity. As the
person e-mailing me put it
"It looks like the arbcom is going to put them both on POV parole, which is
silly; they have this thing about equal treatment. It's like if I report
someone to the police for a theft, the police first of all have to
investigate whether I've committed theft too, because if they charge one,
they have to charge both."
Is this a valid concern?
Jay.