Mediation

Mediation

Posted May 15, 2003 14:46 UTC (Thu) by asacarny (guest, #11228)
Parent article: Christopher Blizzard of mozilla.org Speaks on the Firebird Naming Conflict (MozillaZine)

A proper mediator in a dispute must not ally himself with one side. He must recognize problems in both sides' arguments and work to resolve them. Mr. Walther has asserted that he never asked to be portrayed as a mediator, saying, "It is not my fault that different news writeups of the conflict gave me credit as a mediator." However, he refers to his actions as a mediator in his replies to this article: "I worked to mediate in good faith." So, although he claims otherwise, I see his actions as an attempt to mediate. But Mr. Walther brings up two points, which call his mediation into question:
1) He uses Mozilla and Firebird's competitor, postgres. This, he asserts, makes him biased in favor of Mozilla. But the use of a product does not mean a bias towards it in a dispute. What implies bias is being actively involved in a project. For example, the postings on this article warning about Mozilla sympathizers coming only occurred when the article was linked to MozillaZine. On the other hand, no one besides Mr. Walther has so strongly emphasized _browser choice_ as a factor. I do not see this point as a real bias.
2) He sees that Mozilla specifically "acted in the wrong" while Firebird was "in the right". Thus, at the moment, he sides completely with Firebird.
Presumably he did not make the latter realization only once he had finished "mediating." It is unacceptable for a mediator to come out of a dispute with such vitriol.
I'm also a bit shocked by his attitude, with so much cursing and flaming. In my opinion, his argument would be much more convincing if he used more conservative tactics. I also enjoyed reading pavlov destroy Mr. Walther's claim that Mozilla was arrogant for Apple.
Adam

---

to post comments