Jimbo wrote (in part)
The Mav/168 situation strikes me as being like that.
Here we have two
valued contributors arguing endlessly about something that outside
parties see as entirely pointless (the wording of the introductory
paragraph of [[DNA]], where there's nothing transparently wrong about
either alternative, and it seems impossible that there could be no
compromise).
They want to go to arbitration over it.
Jimbo, have you read any of Anthere's messages on this? She has written to
the list and privately to the mediators (copied to you).
mav and 168 *have* been in mediation. Anthere has spent considerable time
and effort in trying to find solutions. Suggesting the mediation step was
slighted is really unfair to her.
The real issues are *not* the DNA paragraph, they are issues of perceived
sysop abuse on one side and perceived unfairness on the other. I realise
you have a lot of reading to do, not a lot of time and so are likely to miss
things, but this is an important point to acknowledge.
--sannse