blackshoe, on 2013-January-17, 19:39, said:
Well, I imagine you've served on far more committees than I have, but if my case one is not a description of how committees decide, pray tell how do they?
I have served on a few committees and chaired a few too and none of them were decided the way you describe.
When there is a disagreement between members, we try to figure out what causes the disagreement. It could be a difference in interpretation of the facts. We will make sure that we get the facts clarified. The difference could be in the interpretation of the laws. We will get the TD to interpret the laws. And finally, there could be a difference in judgement.
It is very rare for good players to have entirely different judgement. In those cases, there are arguments for both positions and all members know most of them. Some individual members balance the arguments in favor of one position, other individual members balance the arguments in favor of the other. Then the question is how the AC -as a team- balances the arguments.
It may well be that one member is strongly convinced that he TD had it right and that the appeal doesn't have merit, while the three other members understood the TD decision, but they would have ruled differently. If you would take a vote, this would mean that the TD decision would be overturned.
But committees are not there for voting. They are there to solve the problem. And while voting may be fair, it rarely leads to a fair decision, most of the time it will lead to the dictatorship of the majority. So, instead of voting, the members discuss. The positions get closer to each other, because there is understanding for the arguments that are exchanged. This could mean that one or more of the members is convinced or it could mean that the positions drift closer to each other. In the last case, the decision could end up to uphold the TD decision, but to return the deposit.
This may seem like a 'compromise' at the end of a bargaining process (I'll give in a little if you give in a little), but it isn't. The members don't have anything to bargain, because they don't have anything at stake in the process. So they can freely discuss and come to a good decision based on the judgement of the entire AC, rather than on a tally of the judgements of its members.
Rik
I want my opponents to leave my table with a smile on their face and without matchpoints on their score card - in that order.
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds the new discoveries, is not “Eureka!” (I found it!), but “That’s funny…” – Isaac Asimov
The only reason God did not put "Thou shalt mind thine own business" in the Ten Commandments was that He thought that it was too obvious to need stating. - Kenberg
Help
