[WikiEN-l] outside evidence and arbitration

Mon Feb 9 17:43:06 UTC 2004

Poor, Edmund W wrote:

>Delirium raises the "track record" question rather eloquently.
>
>My own view is:
>
>* Trouble caused elsewhere should ALERT US that it might spread here.
>* Generally, users should get a clean slate (see AssumeGoodFaith).
>
>So I'd say the committees should avoid bringing up "outside activities"
>and using them against Wikipedians. No matter how they act elsewhere, as
>long as they behave themselves here.
>
I support this view.  In many courts the record of previous convictions 
is not admissible as evidence for establishing current guilt.

If the general population on these other sites are at all like 
Wikipedians they're probably very argumentative.  Thus, to deal with 
that kind of evidence fairly our arbitrators would need to review the 
entire argument that took place on the other site.  Are the arbitrators 
willing to wade through this stuff, and are we willing to put them 
through such an ordeal?

Ec