I think this could be very problematic. If arbitrators are voted, then whales have huge powers in the system because they can make sure there will be arbitrators who they prefer.
No one should have more power than others to influence who are taking the case which they are part of. Who would trust a system where rich people can get judges for themselves?

Actually what you're saying only proves the opposite point. As Dan Larimer has said, the role of arbitrators like ECAF is just to generate an opinion, not a final verdict, so that the ultimate judgment rests with BPs. And look what we have right now: Bitfinex, due to its impact on the top BPs, is the most powerful judge. Try to win a case against such a player.

That's why it's in the interest of all of us to have the power of the most influential players clearly limited by the Constitution. What we have right now is the opposite of that. We've granted enormous power to the richest. You might say they'll behave responsibly, as they value their reputation. But how is it different from PayPal?

The Constitution should be mostly about limiting the power of the most powerful. As it is now, it's mainly about everybody being subject to the unrestricted judgement of the most powerful.

This argument has been made by many who are skeptical about the system. But they seem to think it will be blind and automatic, instead of intelligent people considering the case from all angles. That's why we have humans involved in the system, so we can get a reasonable outcome.

Judgments in complex matters are... complex. What makes you think we can recreate on EOS a better justice system than the one we have in the real world?

I count myself as crypto-libertarian, too, and that's why I like this system so much. This is the first blockchain that actually defines property rights and tries to enforce them. Creating a new jurisdiction that's not depending on governments is a huge step forward.

Again, why do you think EOS obligatory arbitration has a chance to be a better solution than legacy systems?Just because we have "intelligent people considering the case from all angles"?

It must be remembered that ECAF won't be the only arbitration forum. It's just the first one. There will be free markets for all kinds of arbitrators and mediators which users can choose.

You're confusing arbitration to solve an actual dispute where both sides of the argument choose an arbitrator prior to entering a contract (in this case the competition between arbitrators is indeed a good solution) with "arbitration" to catch those who are accused of violating property rights (in other words, thieves and scammers). In the latter case, it doesn't really matter if ECAF is the only arbitration forum or not, as in this case ECAF acts as police and it's the victim who decides whom to employ, whereas the defendant has no choice in this matter. Imagine being accused of theft by someone connected to the top 21. You stand no chance of having a proper trial.