A biased mediator can be accepted when clue-rich situations block focal points

Evidence

The problem is to find some signal or clue or rationalization that both can perceive as the “right” one, with each party prepared to be disciplined by that signal or clue in the event that it appears to discriminate against him. They must find their clues where they can. (If the map they are using happens, for example, to contain an embarrassing richness of clues, making it difficult to single out any particular one, a fairly arbitrary line drawn as a suggestion by the referee, identical on both maps, might have to be accepted as a “mediator,” even if it is substantially biased toward one of the players.) — Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict, 236

Categorization

  • XREF: Directly parallels the reader’s Mafia-as-mediator thesis: the Don as a biased-but-accepted third party who supplies the focal signal when too many possible solutions paralyze the parties — exactly Gambetta’s private-protection logic. — connects to: Focal points require prominence and uniqueness to coordinate action — Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict, 148; A mediator can create focal points through dramatic suggestion — Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict, 334; Suggestive background stories can shift which equilibria players settle on — Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict, 380 (+1 more)
  • ADDENDUM: Ties to the arbitration/enforcement mechanics the reader is extracting for their analytical integration — the biased mediator scene mirrors how the Don supplies clarity amid too many rival claims.

Broader Connections