QUOTE(One @ Tue 10th March 2009, 5:47pm)
![*](style_images/brack/post_snapback.gif)
QUOTE(everyking @ Tue 10th March 2009, 5:40pm)
![*](style_images/brack/post_snapback.gif)
QUOTE
Yeah. Actually, I'm thinking that May 26 might be a better date for civil disobedience anyway. FR seems to be dead, so I might as well try to raise the
BLP semi-protection project.
You are on the ArbCom; please don't subject us to talk to "civil disobedience". Instead of planning grand gestures predicated on the actions of others, you could use your role as one of the most powerful people on the project to actually bring about some change. As far as I can tell, you have done absolutely nothing in that regard since taking your seat.
Jimbo himself can't bring about change. Policy creation is basically broken, and I'm even more convinced that the only way to get anything is to go do it. That's what I'm proposing.
I remember Kelly Martin said recently, if I remember right, that she would be impressed if the ArbCom, in a big power grab, made itself Wikipedia's formal governance committee instead of just an editor behavior court. I would support that if it brings more management control. One, if you're thinking of something along those lines, I would suggest that ArbCom establish, by fiat:
- A policy management committee with absolute power over policy governance.
- An article content Committee to be the final decision-maker in content disputes.
- At least three editor behavior adjudication committees to handle the way-too-high workload that the current ArbCom has, since the current one also has to manage desysop actions and manage oversight and checkuser actions.
- Make the current ArbCom the presiding committe over all of these, i.e. Wikipedia's configuration control board, but make elections to these committees independent of ArbCom control.
- Make adminship automatic for everyone with 2,000 edits or more and a clean block log, but then give Tony1's adminreview panel formal desysop authority.
You guys do have the power to do this. Remember, only Jimbo can remove one of you. That means that you can force editors to follow your will by blocking them if they refuse to, and no one but Jimbo can do anything to you for doing it. The teenagers and POV-pushers will go nuts if you do this, but more the better.
This post has been edited by Cla68: