Joe Jackson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Mon, 5 Mar 2001 02:17:21 -0500
Sorry to hog the list, but...
I think where things get confused on JC is when we start thinking of JC
cases as feuds between two people. JC is not about resolving disputes (even
though I said dispute in my first post - can I take that back?). JC is
about the embodiment of community norms.
If a case comes into JC, it will be thrown out if it is purely a personal
dispute. A rule has to be alleged to be violated, and a rule being violated
has nothing to do with whatever personal dynamics have occurred between the
accused and accuser(s). A rule being violated is representative of School
Meeting having voiced what is a community limitation.
The idea that JC resolves disputes is inaccurate, and that's another reason
why mediation cannot take its place. So that's why to try to turn a rule
violation into a personal dispute by insinuating that it should go to
mediation is insulting to the plaintiff *and* the defendant.
That's it for me - sorry for three ponderous posts in a row...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 29 2001 - 11:16:50 EST