Misplaced Pages

:Arbitration Committee - Misplaced Pages

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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mav (talk | contribs) at 22:35, 10 July 2004 (→Members: STATUS : Away). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 22:35, 10 July 2004 by Mav (talk | contribs) (→Members: STATUS : Away)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

The arbitration committee exists to impose binding solutions to Misplaced Pages disputes. This solution may be anything up to and including a ban from editing the entire Misplaced Pages for a period of time.

The arbitration committee is the last step in the dispute resolution process - it is a last resort to be turned to when all else has failed. Other steps, including discussion between users and, where appropriate, mediation, should be tried first. The arbitration committee exists to deal with only the most serious disputes and cases of rule-breaking.

Until the beginning of 2004, Jimbo Wales dealt with serious disputes and was the only person with the authority to ban users who were not engaging in simple vandalism (straightforward vandals can be blocked by any administrator). In the last couple of months, this role has begun to be passed to the arbitration committee. Jimbo wrote:

"The arbitration committee can impose a solution that I'll consider to be binding, with of course the exception that I reserve the right of executive clemency and indeed even to dissolve the whole thing if it turns out to be a disaster. But I regard that as unlikely, and I plan to do it about as often as the Queen of England dissolves Parliament against their wishes, i.e. basically never, but it is one last safety valve for our values."

Members

NOTE: The number of active AC members affects the number of AC members needed to reach a ruling. For example, if 7 AC members are active, then 4 votes are needed to reach a majority decision. If 10 are active, then 6 votes are needed, etc.

AC status: Active as of 15 June 2004

  1. Fred Bauder -- fredbaud at ctelco.net
  2. James Forrester, aka Jdforrester -- james at jdforrester.org
  3. Lee Pilich, aka Camembert -- lee at audiblerecords.com
  4. Martin Harper, aka MyRedDice -- wikipedia at myreddice.co.uk
  5. Mark, aka Delirium -- delirium at rufus.d2g.com
  6. Sean Barrett, aka The Epopt -- sean at epoptic.org
  7. The Cunctator -- cunctator at kband.com


AC status: Away as of 12 June 2004

  1. Gutza -- gutza at moongate.ro, but please see my notice on a temporary internet outage
  2. Daniel Mayer, aka Maveric149 -- maveric149 at yahoo.com (I have a lot of CFO tasks to take care of. I should be back late July/early August 2004)


AC status: Inactive as of 15 June 2004

  1. David Friedland, aka Nohat -- david at nohat.net

AC status: Active (has participated in an AC case in the last month), Inactive (has not participated in an AC case in the last month), Away (on a temporary leave of absence)

All volunteered apart from The Cunctator, who was "drafted". Jimbo plans that future arbitrators will be elected. By choice, we don't have a chair.

External link