On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 9:56 AM, Charles Matthews < charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> I see Risker has already asked for a definition of the purpose of such a > list. My feeling so far is that this is all rather [[Blind men and an > elephant]]: different people come up with different aspects of dispute > resolution they think could usefully be discussed on a list. Such as > BLP (Fred) or any other policy matters, or overview of current activity > (the Signpost already does this for Arbitration). You would undoubtedly > get advocacy; would you not get canvassing? Discussion of intractable > edit wars? What is and is not pseudoscience? Second-guessing appeals and > clarifications? Speculation about matters in mediation? If it descends > to "X is a disruptive editor so something should be done" one can expect > some fairly primitive knockabout. > > In my view, the problem needing a solution is to get people with an > onsite dispute to use the lower tiers of dispute resolution correctly. In my view, the problem needing a solution is to get people with an authority over disputes to make the lower tiers of dispute resolution correct --such that they be actually usable and that people will innately know how to "use them.. correctly." It is the *customer that is always right, Charles. Not the vendor. CM: "Blind men and an elephant.. different people come up with different aspects of dispute resolution they think could usefully be discussed on a list" - This is exactly how mailing list technology works. CM: "You would undoubtedly get advocacy; would you not get canvassing? Discussion of intractable edit wars? What is and is not pseudoscience? Second-guessing appeals and clarifications? Speculation about matters in mediation?" AGF and NOT generally answer these as well. But again, as with other stated concerns, I do not see what value there is in being afraid of what may be said by someone. People are intelligent enough to deal with whatever comes up, and no amount of pre-programming is going to substitute for intelligence. CM: "If it descends to "X is a disruptive editor so something should be done" one can expect some fairly primitive knockabout." Is primitive knockabout any worse or better than organized and modernistic knockabout? -Stevertigo _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
