[WikiEN-l] How many Arbitrators should we have?

Thu Oct 6 09:44:17 UTC 2005

Carbonite wrote:

>I agree with Tony that it would be difficult to sustain a very large number
>of arbitrators. However, if we had an efficient system for replacing
>arbitrators, I could see maintaining a "steady state" of 25-35. Replacements
>could be appointed by Jimbo, be elected as alternates during the regular
>ArbCom elections or we could utilize a system like the one suggested by
>Dragons's Flight.

At present we have the election, then people drop out, then Jimbo
drafts people to cover until December. So far the draftees have been
appointed following detailed thought and discussion amongst the
existing and previous AC on the AC mailing list (which contains all
present AC and any past AC who want to be on it.) About half shudder
in horror and say "No thank you!" which doesn't surprise me. I'm not
sure it's a sustainable method in the long run. Also, en: is far too
big for us to know everyone even a bit.

(This may create worries of cabalism amongst the AC. Let me assure
you, speaking from the view inside the sausage factory, that the AC
members frequently agree on things even less than admins do. Oh boy.
But we do respect each others' general cluefulness.)

- d.