Binding mediated consensus decisionmaking on Wikipedia
The English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee has used semi-permanent binding remedies on several occasions in very large and persistent content disputes. One of the recent ones had mediators assigned to help design and manage the approach to find consensus. After consensus was reached no change could occur for a designated period of time. I'll find the links if you are interested in looking at them.
Links to several recent Wikipedia English Arbitration cases that use binding mediation as a tool to resolve content disputes.
- w:en:Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ireland article names Community discussion failed and administrators were chosen by ArbCom to design and lead a Community based process that would led to a binding decision.
- w:en:Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Macedonia 2 w:en:Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia) Community discussion with Arbitration Committee designated panel of three uninvolved administrators who assessed the consensus developed during the discussion, and reported the results to ArbCom and the Community. The results was appended onto this case, and the consensus as assessed by the panel will be enforceable as if it were a naming convention.
- w:en:Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Date delinking Community process that meets the ArbCom case requirement for date delinking and the case was amended with the Community based result.
Binding mediated community discussion has real potential to settle content disputes. The results of these cases need to be evaluated to see if ArbCom enforced binding mediation methods were effective.
That is very interesting! I'm impressed that it seems to have worked! (Has it?) "Binding mediation" could be a model worth supporting, or expanding on with further options that can assist in disputes in controversial topic areas.
If these disputes are settled, people would spend less time infighting, and more time getting actual work done. This could really reduce burnout and improve community health.
I think that the cases need a formal evaluation to see if they are working to resolve the editing conflicts.
I might have some more time later this week. Can you show me where I might look to see how things are going?