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

Tue Mar 8 20:16:22 UTC 2005

--- slimvirgin at gmail.com wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 16:16:18 -0000 (GMT), Tony
> Sidaway  That doesn't
> make sense to me.  I do understand the argument that
> tempbans
> > where seen as unjust could drive away good
> editors, but so can seriously
> > bad behavior.  If a week's rest from editing a few
> articles is *worse*
> > than editing those articles in the presence of the
> behavior about which
> > one wants to make a complaint, I just don't see
> that the complaint can be
> > that serious.  
> 
> Tony, you'd be right if tempbanning were the only
> problem, but there
> is a perception (as is clearly shown by this thread)
> that there is a
> philosophy of seeking to punish both sides
> regardless of the issues,
> in an effort to bend over backwards to be fair -
> which I argue is
> actually leading to unfairness in some cases. It is
> this philosophy
> that is worrying, and the issue of tempbanning
> everyone is simply one
> example of it. Also, in Andy's case, the proposed
> tempban covered
> areas not affected by the dispute, and was therefore
> perceived to be a
> pre-judgment punishment, not just a peace-keeping
> measure. In matters
> of justice, perceptions matter as much as reality.
> 
> Sarah

Exactly.  When I made my last arbcom case, against
Guanaco, Fred Bauder, on his own initiative, brought
in other "evidence" which had no bearing on the case
under consideration. It was clear that the arbcom, or
at least one member, was more interested in trying to
punish me than in making a decision based upon the
evidence presented to them.

RickK

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