Misplaced Pages

User talk:Robert McClenon/Crisis: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< User talk:Robert McClenon Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 00:50, 28 August 2005 editMaurreen (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers22,724 edits solutions?← Previous edit Revision as of 01:11, 28 August 2005 edit undoMaurreen (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers22,724 edits →Solutions?Next edit →
Line 14: Line 14:


Maybe we should start ]? ] ] 00:50, 28 August 2005 (UTC) Maybe we should start ]? ] ] 00:50, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

:Here are a couple ideas, food for thought:
#Enlarge or otherwise change ArbComm so it can hear more cases more quickly.
#Invent a new designation -- maybe "caseworker". These people would be empowered and possibly have the duty to resolve any disagreements as they see fit. Think of them as combining the functions of a mediator and enforcer. They would need to be approved by at least 90 percent of those voting. ] ] 01:11, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:11, 28 August 2005

Problematical Accused Viewpoint

But, it is cleverer than you think , McC: majority opinion rules. Of course it is completely illogical , in fact I assume it is a typo error, asit is so contradictory of sources.

Other thing is that , well, arbitration doesn't achieve anything, a little mental spank and a few days in the can at best.

Then, well you get users like me who have a floating IP number.

I think Jimbo in fact knows all this , and is chuckling , as he is very clever .Famekeeper 23:34, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Solutions?

Robert, I only read part of what you wrote on the main page here, but I agree that things could be improved and that ideally mediation would come before user conduct RFCs.

Maybe we should start Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution reform? Maurreen (talk) 00:50, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Here are a couple ideas, food for thought:
  1. Enlarge or otherwise change ArbComm so it can hear more cases more quickly.
  2. Invent a new designation -- maybe "caseworker". These people would be empowered and possibly have the duty to resolve any disagreements as they see fit. Think of them as combining the functions of a mediator and enforcer. They would need to be approved by at least 90 percent of those voting. Maurreen (talk) 01:11, 28 August 2005 (UTC)