Wikipedia talk:Mediation Committee/Archive/3

Karmafist
I was just wondering why most of the mediation committee has yet to comment on Karmafist's nomination. I'll like to support him as an outside user, but I'm hoping the committee will take a look at the comment revised comment I made there. Ac e  tic  ' Acid  22:41, 27 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I guess perhaps karmafist had not interacted with the medcom as much as I and flcelloguy had. R  e  dwolf24  (talk) 03:16, 28 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Ah. Is there a set number of votes a candidate has to receive from the MC to be promoted? Like a 2/3 majority? Ac  e  tic  ' Acid  02:23, 29 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I'd prefer it if it was more like 4/5 to 5/6, as a mediator can be more important than a bureaucrat in the way that if they cant mediate, theyll screw up whoever theyre mediating for. Also keep in mind that MC members votes count more than non-MC members, though we still appreciate your votes. Also we should have a certain amount of people voting. Im not gonna give too many rules cause then I'd be painting myself into a corner. But that's the general idea. R  e  dwolf24  (talk) 02:26, 29 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't think there's a required number of support votes to pass, but judging from past nominations and the working at WP:MC, I think every mediator has the right to veto any nomination. If you take a look at Blankfaze's nomination at Requests to be mediator/archive, he had the support of every mediator except Danny, who opposed his nomination. His nomination failed because of "opposition from the MC", even though there were 6 supports and only 1 oppose from within the MC. In addition, WP:MC says "A user shall become a mediator after an unspecified period of time as long as there is no opposition from the Mediation Committee, no veto from Jimbo, and general agreement from the community." Thus, a mediator's vote is not to be cast lightly. By the way, why are Redwolf24's and my applications not archived at Requests to be mediator/archive, instead at at Mediation Committee/Old nominations? Just curious... :-) Thanks! (Wow, I've written a whole lot... ) Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | WS 20:48, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see now. Does this mean Karma's nomination has failed due to Ed's oppose vote? Ac  e  tic  ' Acid  00:45, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
 * That will be for me to decide. R  e  dwolf24  (talk) 00:53, 30 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Except for I voted for him, so that would be abuse. R  e  dwolf24  (talk) 00:54, 30 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Do you want or need an outside arbiter on this issue? Kelly Martin 16:42, 4 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Nah, I'll just remove it if anyone directly opposes. R  e  dwolf24  (talk) 23:35, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Removal of mediator
Is there a formal process for removing a mediator, or are these positions permanant, and without the communities ability to alter? I think it is important that User:Ed Poor not be placed in a position of mediation, for many, many reasons, not the least of which being his unfortunate involvement here. I would hope the line can be drawn at those who actively pursue conflict and mistrust. Sam Spade 18:30, 3 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I guess if worst came to worst we could vote on his possible impeachment. Though in most cases I've seen him do, he's done a fair job. R  e  dwolf24  (talk) 22:29, 3 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't know if Ed Poor needs to be removed as mediator. I do think there ought to be some sort of review process or something that deals with a mediator when they botch a job pretty badly. At least noting that it really was botched and pointing to what would fix the situation. I believe Ed Poor became completely biased in mediating the Terri Schiavo article about a month after he started mediating. When SlimVirgin edited the article, Ed stopped being neutral and began defending SlimVirgin and attacking people who criticized her. Ed blocked me once for NPA violations, and I didn't protest that block. But then he blocked me again for NPA violations and all I had done was start a user RfC against SlimVirgin on my talk page. I've asked but Ed has refused to point out any specific NPA violations that got me blocked the second time. Ed also gave another user (Neuroscientist) a warning to not violate NPA when all Neuroscientist had done was write a detailed critique of several factual (neurological) errors in SlimVirgin's edit. I filed the user RfC against SlimVirgin. Ed gave it partial and hesitant endorsement, then turned around and attacked the people who filed the RfC and recommend we delete it. And then Ed attacked me personally. Ed did this all while acting as official mediator on the article in question. Three of teh editors working on the article left wikipedia soon after that incident. Ed Poor did not simply fail to resolve the problem around the Terri Schiavo article, he engaged in the dispute when his friend SlimVirgin began editing the article. It's not for me to decide if Ed should continue mediating or not, but I think it's clear that there should be some sort of process for the mediation committee to deal with an individual mediator who clearly engaged in teh dispute, handed out an undeserved block, gave undeserved warnings about violating NPA, and attacked some of the editors working on the article. FuelWagon 16:18, 4 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Hello? Is anyone home? FuelWagon 03:24, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

I think his involvement @ Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_mediation/Sam_Spade_and_Exploding_Boy was unhelpful, particularly the taking credit after he was asked not to be involved. Sam Spade 12:29, 7 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Sam, I was joking. All I did was move you guys to a subpage. Then when RedWolf24 said you were done, I made a flippant comment. Sorry about the flippant comment; and congratulations to you and E.B. on resolving the matter on your own. Uncle Ed 15:53, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Template:MedComMem
I created the wiki-bable like template for you. Enjoy. :P --Cool Cat Talk 17:40, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
 * It's beautiful! :o Great job. Ac  e  tic  ' Acid  18:36, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Independent Mediator
Hello all, I am disappointed with the methodology used for a decision, and would ask you to change it for future potential members of the MC. Regardless of this, I wish to help resolve conflicts in any way I can when I see them and i'm a neutral party to the dispute. Therefore, I'm using the term "Independent Mediator", without linking to the Medcom page. If this is considered inflammatory due any potential confusion with the Mediation Committee or the Mediation Committee's potentially sole use of the word Mediation within Wikipedia, please let me know and offer another suggestion and I will change it. Karmafist 03:22, 13 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Karmafist: Might I suggest joining the Mediation Cabal? As to the substance of the issue: I've voiced my concerns over allowing any mediator to veto candidates on the mailing list, so I won't repeat them here. -- Essjay ·  Talk 13:21, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Excellent idea, I also got that input from Flcelloguy and I've changed my userbox to reflect accordingly, and i'm glad I didn't cause any undue ruckus. I'm not in a big rush to join any mailing lists right now, but I'll take your word for what you said above. It's a fairly minor thing right now. Bureaucracy where is isn't necessary isn't my favorite thing in the world either, and that's the impression i've gotten so far from the MC as a whole, despite the fact that I have almost universal respect for the individual membership. Karmafist 18:38, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree with Karmafist, and it should take more than one oppose vote to sink a candidate, especially if it "justified" by exaggerated claims. Being indepedant mediator lets me get away from all this oversimplification. The committee is way overworked anyway due to rejected good candidates...oh well...not my problem.  Voice of All  T |@| Esperanza   02:03, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm not commenting directly on any of this, but it is my understanding from the mailing list that the single-oppose veto has been done away with. Other mediators, am I correct in this? -- Essjay ·   Talk 05:56, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Apparently you are correct, according to an email by a fellow mediator. Voice of All  T |@| Esperanza   06:16, 6 November 2005 (UTC)


 * That is my understanding.  [[Sam Korn ]] 13:43, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Mine as well. -JCarriker 08:14, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Wow, Wikipedia even has its own laws, court system and government! But all three can be edited by anyone... Previous unsigned comments by Fuzzform. Flcelloguy (A note? ) 00:40, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Oh, a single oppose? No problem: Karmafist, you'd be MOST welcome at the mediation cabal, the system which actually works, and does real dispute resolution work at all levels.   Kim Bruning 03:34, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Maoririder
The arbitration committee has assigned Maoririder a mentorship. We didn't work out the details, though - we would appreciate it if you guys could do that. Raul654 19:51, 26 November 2005 (UTC)


 * OK, this seems like a thing the whole Mediation Committee could work and accomplish. I'll bring it up on the Mediation mailing list and CC all discussion to you, Raul. Flcelloguy (A note? ) 22:31, 26 November 2005 (UTC)


 * P.S. I just realized that I don't have your email, Raul. Could you email me your email address so that I can CC the discussion to you, or should I CC the discussion to the ArbCom mailing list? Thanks. Flcelloguy (A note? ) 22:52, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Resignation
I hereby tender my resignation from the Mediation Committee effective immediately. -- Essjay ·   Talk 16:57, 29 November 2005 (UTC)


 * A bit disappointed that you left. Nevertheless, thanks for all your work on the MedCom and elsewhere; you were a great asset to the community.  Ral315 (talk) 17:37, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Essjay will certainly be missed: I am sorry to return to find him gone. For entirely other reasons, I tender my resignation also, having been an MC member for a year without even successfully convincing my two cats to stop biting each other. My involvement at WP has taken a serious hit from a serious ramp-up in work responsibilities, and therefore I can't be trusted to stick around long enough to mediate a dispute to its end, even if I did feel remotely competent. I am grateful for the trust shown me by those who voted me in, and am sorry to have disappointed them. I will do what I can, as always, to informally defuse arguments whenever I encounter them, and if I should ever have time and energy again in my life to take on Wiki-mediation, I will prostrate myself before you all as a nominee once more. My very best wishes to you all, and if I can be of help in an unofficial capacity, please do give a shout my way. Yours Incompetently, Jwrosenzweig 22:19, 20 December 2005 (UTC)



Indeed. Ral315 (talk) 03:01, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Chair
I see that the acting chair, Redwolf24, has gone on indef. break. The actual chair, MGM, is also on break. I resigned from the committee prior to my departure last month, and I don't have any intention of getting back into actual mediation, but if the committee needs someone to take over assigning cases (as Red did) I would be happy to serve in that capacity until such time as Red or MGM returns, or a new chair is elected. -- Essjay ·   Talk 21:44, 3 January 2006 (UTC) With Red's break over, offer withdrawn. — Essjay  ·   Talk 01:42, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Mediation request
Salutations. I have placed a request for the title of mediator on the project page, and I noticed that no one has made any votes or comments regarding it. Could someone tell me why no one is longer voting? Perhaps the process is inactive as of late? -MegamanZero|Talk 05:04, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't call it inactive. But we usually take a while to vote on users.  Don't worry about it, and I'm sure we'll start commenting in a few days.  Ral315 (talk) 18:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I hope I make the cut. :) -MegamanZero|Talk 19:03, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Former Mediators
Redwolf24 suggested to me shortly after my return that I should vote on some of the candidates that were up for mediatior; I declined due to my resignation from the committee. However, it popped back to my head recently, and I thought I would bring it up here: Is it acceptable for former mediators to comment (under the mediator section, obviously, as anyone may comment in the general section) on new requests, and if so, should the chair consider thier "votes" when promoting? Further, should any of us really be listed as "former" rather than "inactive" mediators, since we are subject to being recalled in certain situations (similar to the individuals who have been recently deputized to fill in during periods of high activity)? What do others think? -- Essjay ·   Talk 04:58, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Of course, I'm not a mediator, so may opinion may not mean much, but I think former mediators commentting on candidates is a excellent idea. Since they've had the posistion before, they're experienced, they can give accurate views on why this person may or may not be suitible for the posistion, as well as provide constructive critisism. I believe that its more accurate, then say, a newbie or whatnot making a vote. Just my two cents. -MegamanZero|Talk 05:42, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I understand why users are listed as former (for example, I don't see Ed Poor coming back and mediating, nor do I see Angela doing so). If a mediator wishes to come back, they can become "active" again.  As far as former mediators, I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to vote as mediators.  Ral315 (talk) 13:04, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Just noting it here; Red asked me to return to the committee, even if only inactive, as I might wish to be active in the future. After considering it for quite a while, I've gone ahead and moved myself back into the "inactive" category, but I'm not intending to take any actual mediations until I've had more of a chance to get settled back into Wikipedia. (I've been gone for almost two months; I wasn't doing anything more than checking messages all thru November, and I was gone all of December.) Just wanted to leave a note explaining why my name was back under "inactive"; if anyone feels it is out-of-process, put me back under "former" and I'll reapply sometime in the future if I feel the call. -- Essjay ·   Talk 11:40, 13 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't mind at all; of all our "inactive" or "former" mediators, I haven't seen a single one where I'd be uncomfortable with them returning at some point. Ral315 (talk) 14:48, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Chair election
I would like to call election for the next chair. It seems uncool to me to have the actual chair pretty much absent, and given the change in atmosphere brought by the recent Arbcom elections and people moving around, it might be a good idea to put forth the question as to who is willing to serve as chair. --Improv 00:38, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I am new to the committee, but I am willing to serve if I am needed. —Guanaco 01:19, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I am also willing to serve, now that I don't need to worry about being elected to Arbcom. --Improv 01:22, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I should note that provided I'm satisfied that prospective chairs have compatible views and will do a good job, and that we have an actual chair rather than a deputy replacement chair, I'll be happy to bow out from running in the election. --Improv 12:11, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, can we do this on the mailing list? I've sent an e-mail to that effect.  Ral315 (talk) 01:48, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * BTW, who is in charge of the mailing list now? I have subscribed but still need to be added. Cheers, -Will Beback 20:48, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll leave a note for Anthere. Ral315 (talk) 21:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Oops, I've been lax in co-managing the mailing list. I took care of it. --Improv 12:09, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm also willing to serve as chair, as I worked pretty closely with Red during his time as acting chair. Essjay  Talk •  Contact 05:47, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I've started the mailing list vote. If anyone still isn't on the mailing list, feel free to vote here. As far as I know, members who have volunteered themselves for chair are: &mdash; Asbestos | Talk   (RFC)  14:23, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
 * User:Guanaco
 * User:Improv
 * User:Ral315
 * User:Essjay
 * I am satisfied that the other three people running will do a good job, and withdraw from standing for chair. I primarily wanted the current situation resolved, and it looks like it will be. --Improv 18:32, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Proposed Project: Alternative Dispute Resolution
I have posted Alternative Dispute Resolution as a proposed group at Wikiproject/List_of_proposed_projects. The project would improve/create articles in the main namespace relating to negotiation, conciliation, facilitation, arbitration and other alternatives to litigation. I thought the users at medCom might be interested. Lets see if it gains sufficient participatants and go from there.--Edivorce 17:32, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Proposal
I ask the members of the Mediation Committee a question. I am currently working on a very massive change to how the dispute resoution is done as well as how Wikipedia functions. I want to make an Appeals board (for use of a better name), that would resolve issues before they go to the Arbitration Committee as well as help enforce there (arbcom's) rulings. Earlier, when I sought to make a higher group it didn't work, but my goal would be reached with either proposal. Now back to the idea: The board would have nine members, three selected by the Arbcom, five selected by the public (users) and one selected by Jimbo. They would each serve six-month terms (I can always change this) and would require a simple majority to make a descision. I feel that I must recieve your advise, because you deal with disputes all the time. So I ask for your comments, good or bad. Thank you for your time, ;) Wiki  e Zach 01:15, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Our means of solving disputes is entirely orthoganal to what you describe. There may be interested parties here, but I don't think we're interested as a group. --Improv 02:16, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I am just trying to gain support Wiki  e Zach 02:50, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't see the net benefit of it, and believe it would just be yet another part of an already complex arbitration system. Why would issues be resolved better by the appeals board than by MedCom, RfC and RfAr? How can you appeal something before a decision is made? If the appeals board makes its own decisions, are they enforcable? If they are, aren't they just another ArbCom? If they're not, what is their purpose? Which board can pull rank, Appeals or ArbCom? If ArbCom, what's the point in appealing to a board with no power to overturn a decision? The project sounds unnecessary to me. &mdash; Asbestos | Talk   (RFC)  19:19, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Chair
I've updated the section, Essjay is now chair. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 19:36, 7 February 2006 (UTC)