Is Judge Judy the solution to eBay's problems?

As a dispute resolution guy, I keep my ear to the ground on any developments in the world of online conflict management. And it appears there's been a mini-boomlet in innovation as of late. First came the launch of peoplescourtraw.com, which enables people in a disagreement to upload short video clips stating their case, which is then put to the site's visitors to decide. Then a few weeks later came AllRise.com, an Israeli startup that looks quite a bit like the Community Court eBay UK announced last fall (but subsequently canceled) in that panels of online juries decide cases submitted on the site.

The question these sites raise for me is how applicable these models would be to eBay and PayPal. A little while ago a friend sent me a post by Zac Bissonnette on a stock discussion board that suggested  Judge Judy would be an ideal solution to eBay's problems with sloppy sellers and fraudulent buyers.  The post included a link to a widely circulated YouTube video taken from a Judge Judy episode that dealt with a dispute between two eBay members. From the post:

"Kelli Filkins appeared on Judge Judy to defend plaintiffs' claim that she had defrauded them on eBay by sending them a picture of a phone they paid $240 for. She claimed that the ad said it was for a picture only.

What ensued is possibly the greatest smackdown in the history of Judge Judy -- who told Ms. Filkins that she is an "outrageous person." The sharp-tongued judge went on to say: "If you live to 120, you're not gonna be as smart as I am in one finger. You may weigh more, but you're not gonna be smarter than I am in one figure." Burn sauce!

Given Judy's reputation as a no-nonsense judge who will crack down on shenanigans, eBay could work out a licensing deal to brand its complaint resolution system as "Judge Judy" -- and run an ad campaign where she talks about her commitment to making eBay a safe place for buyers and sellers."

Objection sustained
Now as a dispute resolution guy, watching Judge Judy gives me hives. It seems less about resolving the problem between the two parties than about providing an excuse for Judge Judy to indulge her rage-a-holic tendencies by belittling and abusing the people in front of her. For some reason, people like to watch this kind of thing. I also think that because Judge Judy uses the trappings of the judicial system (big wooden desk, robes, etc.) people think that what she's dishing out is justice. She may "tell it like it is," (a la Simon on American Idol) but I think the "burn sauce" mentioned above is unnecessary and inappropriate.

All rise for Judge Griff?
That said, maybe members of the eBay Community would like to be able to bring their disputes in front of a forum like AllRise, the People's Court, or Judge Judy. Well, not Judge Judy, necessarily -- but maybe Judge Griff? If both the buyer and seller agreed to resolve their dispute that way then I don't see why eBay should prevent it. Maybe we could make it transparent and let others in the community come and review the processes as well, like this Judge Judy video.

I'd be interested to hear what readers of the blog would say about this idea (you can leave your comments on the Chatter blog discussion board). Personally, I think that resolving disputes by mutual agreement is the best way to go, because it builds trust and the members involved are much more likely to abide by a decision that they personally approved. But the judicial model does have a long track record of success, and it might be useful in some cases -- especially if it was a way for the Community to enforce the standards instead of eBay and PayPal employees.