Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

What this page is for: 
This page is focused on discussing the information on the page attached to this one, and also for limited discussion of the Arbitration Committee itself. Requesting that a case be taken up here isn't likely to help you, but those in the dispute resolution community would be happy to assist.
This page isn't for requesting arbitration
Wikipedia:Resolving disputes contains the official policy on dispute resolution for English Wikipedia. Arbitration is generally the last step, when a dispute cannot be resolved by any other means including informal or formal mediation, or by asking the community its opinion on the matter.
File a request for arbitration • Guide to arbitration

Concerning recusal[edit]

As a general point of principle, arbitrators who recuse themselves from a specific case or process should try to stay away from it completely. If they are asked for pertinent information by other participants they may respond, and if they are parties to a case they may take all the actions appropriate for parties, but otherwise they should refrain from commenting. The rationale is that their status as arbitrators may give them undue influence on other arbs even if they don't vote. I understand the temptation, but it ought to be resisted. Best regards, Looie496 (talk) 14:27, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

If an arbitrator has been involved with a dispute (or with the disputants) and has relevant information to contribute, but is not party, then why would you want this evidence not to be available to the committee? Arbitrators who are recused do not take part in any behind the scenes discussion about the matters from which they are recused, and the rest of the committee are perfectly capable of treating their colleague the same as they would anybody else. Thryduulf (talk) 20:26, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Anything in particular prompting this comment?
I don't think there's a one-size-fits-all rule for deciding when to participate with the "arb hat" off, but speaking for myself I want as much information as possible about a problem. Asking people with pertinent knowledge to keep mum for "appearance" reasons would be a net negative. The idea that arbs would be specifically more likely to defer to or agree with other arbs always surprises me when people express it. Arbcom is a group of 15 people elected for the express purpose of having opinions on things. The model wouldn't work if we just agreed with each other all the time. Opabinia regalis (talk) 04:20, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
I suppose I didn't make the point clearly enough. If recused arbs have pertinent knowledge, of course it should be made available. But too often I have seen recused arbs expressing opinions about a case, and that is what generally shouldn't happen. Looie496 (talk) 13:28, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Recusal means an arbitrator can't participate in the case in their capacity as an arbitrator. That means no voting, no participation in private or arb-only discussions and areas, no participation in formulation of case decision drafts, and so on. It does not, however, forbid participation in the same way any member of the community could, such as offering evidence and opinions in the same area open to all editors for doing so. A recused arb is still a member of the community, and can do all the things open to non-arb members of the community for a matter they're recused on. Seraphimblade Talk to me 14:38, 28 October 2016 (UTC)