After four months, one week, thirteen hours, and thirteen minutes, the Wikipedia arbitration to which I previously linked was finally closed.

One of the seven editors involved — indeed, the editor who petitioned the Arbitration Committee in the first place, specifically targetting another editor — has been stripped of his administrative privileges. He and two other parties to the case are part of a larger cabal who've abused administrative privileges and acted like a pack of hyænæ. Although his petition launched the case, at some point he seems to have ceased to actively participate, and thus made himself the best candidate to be thrown under the bus. The remaining four parties, two of whom are also members ot the cabal, have been admonished. The original target of the petition seems to have been the least scathed party.

In any event, it appears that the cabal has taken enough of a hit to pacify its active opponents, but not so great a hit as to bring about an intervention by Wales on its behalf. But the Arbitration Committee has (somewhat as predicted) lost much respect all-around, albeït perhaps even more for having taken so long to reach a decision than for having failed to act more decisively against the cabal.

I've been looking at background discussion on Wikipedia, and it seems to be doing a fair job of tearing itself to shreds.

There is a set of intertangled disputes involving two camps. The Request for Arbitration to which I earlier linked seems to be illustrative; it's certainly not the only example. See also Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Tony Sidaway and the resulting request for more arbitration. [(2008:07/24) I have up-dated the previous link.]

The requests for arbitration between these camps don't seem to be producing actual arbitration, even when the Arbitration Committee had earlier agreed to take a case. The Arbitration Committee is beginning to be hammered for failing to reach any decisions in that case to which I earlier linked. One member of the Arbitration Committee is trying to get the others to agree to just dismiss the case, but the Committee isn't even deciding to flee from responsibility. (There are grumblings that the Arbitration Committee should be abolished if it does flee.)

Now, as to that case, I'm not sufficiently informed to condemn all of the parties, nor to exonerate any of the parties, but I am sufficiently informed to identify the behavior of some of the parties as egregious. And those parties all happen to be in one of those two camps, which camp has strongly allied itself with Jimmy Donal Wales — that's right, the Jimbo Wales who provided the funding that launched Wikipedia, the Jimbo Wales who reserved the general right to over-turn any decision of the Arbitration Committee.

If the Arbitration Committee fails to come down on those parties hard, then those parties are going to become even more out-of-hand, and the committee will lose a lot of respect all-around (though one camp may prize them as fine toad-eaters). On the other hand, if the Arbitration Committee does come down on those parties, then they may alienate Jimbo Wales, who may even over-rule their decisions or so weaken the measures taken that they become not so much meaningless as ironic.

If you want a sense of the dynamic behind Wikipedia administration, then read

(If you're only going to read one of these pages, then I would suggest that it be the evidence page.) FWIW, I recognize some of the disputants as villains, and some of the others as either villains or rather great fools; I don't know, one way or the other, about the rest. It's quite possible that some are fine people, or that all are jerks.