[WikiEN-l] ArbCom - too attached to 'equal treatment'?

Mon Mar 7 14:45:07 UTC 2005

Fred wrote:
> A full investigation will improve the quality of our decisions. A
> partial or
> poor investigation restricted by artificial rules will reduce their
> quality.
> It's pretty much summed up by "The more you know..."

I think you are missing the point.  I don't see anyone wanting to
limit the AC's ability to look wherever they like.  The issue is of
who they have the right to impose penalties on.

Again:  if someone is accused by a RfA listing, they have the
opportunity to write in their own defence and to have their
fellows write in their defence.  Then the AC imposes a penalty
on a different person who had no such opportunity since they
didn't know it was necessary.  It is fundamentally unfair.

The accuser is treated worse than the accused.

The solution: except perhaps in emergencies, the AC should
only be able to impose penalties on someone who has had an
opportunity to mount a defence.  There should be a rule on
how much opportunity must be given.

Zero.

__________________________________ 
Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday! 
Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web 
http://birthday.yahoo.com/netrospective/