User:Privatemusings/ACE2008 statement

{| cellpadding="10" cellspacing="8" style="width: 100%; background-color: #dbd8a5; border: 1px solid #bcb87b; vertical-align: top; -moz-border-radius-topleft: 8px; -moz-border-radius-bottomleft: 8px; -moz-border-radius-topright: 8px; -moz-border-radius-bottomright: 8px;"
 * colspan="2" style="padding: 0;" |
 * style="width: 70%; background-color: #fdfac7; border: 1px solid #9a9762; border-right-width:4px; border-bottom-width:4px; vertical-align: top; -moz-border-radius-topleft: 8px; -moz-border-radius-bottomleft: 8px; -moz-border-radius-topright: 8px; -moz-border-radius-bottomright: 8px;" rowspan="3" |
 * style="width: 70%; background-color: #fdfac7; border: 1px solid #9a9762; border-right-width:4px; border-bottom-width:4px; vertical-align: top; -moz-border-radius-topleft: 8px; -moz-border-radius-bottomleft: 8px; -moz-border-radius-topright: 8px; -moz-border-radius-bottomright: 8px;" rowspan="3" |

=Privatemusings' Big Ideas for Arbcom=

I've got 5 major ideas which if elected I will implement immediately. I can't promise a fully functional dispute resolution system which ensures world peace and a fruitful, collegial atmosphere around the wiki overnight, but I do feel sure that each of the following would really help. If you agree with the ideas below, vote for me! If you like the ideas, but don't like me - pester a favoured candidate to adopt them! If you like some of the ideas, but not others, then feel free to use the talk page to chat about it, or just lobby for them yourself elsewhere. Despite how it can sometimes feel around the wiki, absolutely every single editor on this project truly is empowered to 'be the change they seek'. You, dear wiki voter, can really make a difference, and I'd love it if you voted for me! :-)

Now without further ado.... 5 big ideas;

1) An 'enquiry' model for arbitration cases
Have a look through any historic arb cases, and have a look at how involved the arbs have been 'on wiki'. You might expect to see questions, comments, you know - general engagement with the matter in hand, but rather strangely you don't. What you see is a terrible setup where the most involved people are invited to take pot shots at each other, bedroom philosophers and armchair attorneys ensure their tuppence is heard, and generally speaking the arb.s ignore the lot of them, popping in to vote on a few motions that perhaps one of their number has knocked up. This may be an uncharitable description, and to be sure, some fine folk have done some fine work from within the system - but it's a rubbish system. Transparently, and demonstrably so.

As an arb, within hours of a case I have voted to accept being accepted, I will create a new arb subpage 'Questions from an arb' where I will begin, and continue over the process of the case, to ask questions directly of all parties.

It's my sincere belief that there's a significant subset of cases which can be speedily resolved through such a process, which will at all times seek to de-escalate and genuinely arbitrate a difficult situation. Arbs need to be far, far more active in progressing cases.

2) A Council of helpful souls
This pragmatic idea is a way of introducing the concept of 'juries', to a degree, into the arb process. If elected, I will create a subpage of my userspace, where any wiki editor can sign up as willing to be on the 'Council of helpful souls'. In each case I am involved in, I will randomly invite 5 of the souls to a new subpage of each case - 'PM's Chambers'. The council will discuss with me questions to ask of the parties, and offer thoughts and ideas as to best ways forward. These '5 good men and true' will be the only editors permitted to edit within my Chambers, and I will seek their counsel on all matters. In this way, parts of the highest level of dispute resolution will be devolved, the community is afforded a clear, and superior, path to participate in arbitration, and the project as a whole can evaluate the benefits of expanding such a system to replace the rather dated concept of a stuffy committee operating largely behind closed doors. Arbs are not smarter than anyone else, and disinterested input is both fantastically useful, and important.

3) External Advice
As an arb, I will immediately begin lobbying the WMF for a small grant to a budget dedicated to seeking external advice in dispute resolution. Disputes on wikipedia are between human beings, and there are many universally acknowledged experts in 'best practice' in resolving tensions for the greater good. I have strong belief that the WMF will support the commissioning of an expert external agency or individual to take a good look at our practices and policies, and I am most certainly prepared to financially support this initiative myself. I believe the benefits of external advice are so powerful, that I will happily put my money where my mouth is. At this stage of dispute resolution's evolution, Wikipedia does not need to re-invent the wheel, it needs to learn to listen, and ask for help sometimes - I will make this happen.

4) Communication
Wikipedia is one of the world's most popular websites, and the arbitration committee sits at the head of the dispute resolution system. How does its central communication system currently work? It's a mailing list setup years ago, which frequently acts as a black hole. This is pathetic. I seek revolution in this system - it needs to be fixed, though it may take a couple of months. I will update publicly as to my progress in ensuring that the arbcom adopt systems which ensure a prompt response, let people know where they stand, and most importantly stop actively making matters worse through absolutely unforgivable inaction. As a community, we have the right to be furious about this situation, and as an arb, I will change it.

5) Smile :-)
Every single post, and every single effort made on this project is intended to help make a really cool website a bit better. We've already built the world's largest ever encyclopedia, and god knows where we'll go from here! It's important to smile, to have fun, and to remember that we're here to help, and at its best it's an absolute blast to be involved with Wikipedia. I've long advocated the need for folk to only engage with Wikipedia in this spirit - that it shouldn't be stressful, upsetting, and everyone must remember that they have the right to wander off from the keyboard to get some sun on their back once in a while. Wikipedia needs to be a healthy environment - and part of that is encouraging people to treat it with respect, but not develop nor nurture an unhealthy relationship to volunteering here. I know it's not going to help with the specifics of difficult cases, but it's really important to me - and it should be to you.... Smile! :-)