ArbCom, for all its pseudo-legalism, is really not set up for that. It's very strongly discouraged, as far as I can tell. I tried taking that role in the Richard Norton case (he not being a friend of mine, but my sense of fair play being jolted by the way he was treated over ancient Crimes Against the Wiki) and I'm sure that it helped him a little. The "defendant" in these cases is penalized for fighting back, there really have to be outside voices coming to their aid for any reasonable defense to be possible.SneakySasha wrote: Actually what everyone who ends up in the public shaming that is Arcom really needs is their own personal public defender.
There is probably also some "Stanford Prison Experiment"-type bully behavior that is inherent in the process and the insertion of opposing voices who are not those of the defendant may well attenuate this situation.
This is an excellent point — there needs to be some organized "legal defense" for good faith content people who wind up wearing white smocks and facing the executioners.
RfB