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

Mon Mar 7 14:59:28 UTC 2005

zero 0000 said:
> 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.

The arbcom is empowered to make such decisions.  There is no issue that I
can see here, except for those who want editors to be free to complain
about other editors without suffereing the consequences of their own
behavior where this has been deleterious to Wikipedia.
It's all a matter of what you think arbcom is for. Is it to be a catspaw
with which adept procedure-manipulators can wage war on their less adept
enemies, or is it (as I believe to be the case) a body elected by the
editors and delegated by Jimmy Wales to stop editors doing harm to
Wikipedia by their actions?  If the latter, it should levy penalties to
all who merit such penalties.  If it only ever penalizes the people
nominated by the petitioners, then it can only ever be driven by the
perceptions of, and the prejudices of, the cleverer, more adept, editors.