Revision as of 14:14, 24 May 2006

all proposed

After considering /Evidence and discussing proposals with other arbitrators, parties and others at /Workshop place proposals which are ready for voting here.

Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or abstain.

• Only items that receive a majority "support" vote will be passed.
• Items that receive a majority "oppose" vote will be formally rejected.
• Items that do not receive a majority "support" or "oppose" vote will be open to possible amendment by any Arbitrator if she/he so chooses. After the amendment process is complete, the item will be voted on one last time.

Conditional votes for or against and abstentions should be explained by the Arbitrator before or after his/her time-stamped signature. For example, an Arbitrator can state that she/he would only favor a particular remedy based on whether or not another remedy/remedies were passed.

On this case, 0 Arbitrators are recused and 5 are inactive, so 5 votes are a majority.

For all items

Proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on. Non-Arbitrators may comment on the talk page.

Motions and requests by the parties

Place those on /Workshop.

Proposed temporary injunctions

Four net "support" votes needed to pass (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first vote is normally the fastest an injunction will be imposed.

Template

1) {text of proposed orders}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed orders}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed orders}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed final decision

Proposed principles

Template

1) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Don't disrupt Misplaced Pages to illustrate a point

1) As pointed out at Misplaced Pages:Don't stuff beans up your nose, there are unanticipated things a user can do which are disruptive. Such disruptive patterns are covered broadly by Misplaced Pages:Don't disrupt Misplaced Pages to illustrate a point.

Support:

1. 14:14, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed findings of fact

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Multiple accounts created by PoolGuy

1) PoolGuy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has created a great number of user accounts, see an incomplete list at Category:Misplaced Pages:Sock puppets of PoolGuy.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 14:14, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Disruptive effect of multiple sockpuppets

2) The multiple user accounts created by PoolGuy have proved disruptive, drawing negative attention, especially from Nlu (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA).

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 14:14, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed remedies

Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

PoolGuy restricted to one user account

1) User PoolGuy shall use one user account. That user account may be PoolGuy or a new account which he may create in order to get a fresh start. Should he create a new account he need not disclose its name.

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed enforcement

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Enforcement by block

1) Should PoolGuy continue his past pattern of creating multiple user accounts he may be blocked until he abandons the pattern of creating multiple accounts.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 14:14, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Discussion by Arbitrators

General

Exactly how this started and who is right or wrong is irrelevant. It just needs to stop. NO MORE BEANS IN YOUR NOSE! Fred Bauder 14:14, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Motion to close

Implementation notes

Clerks and arbitrators should use this section to clarify their understanding of the final decision--at a minimum, a list of items that have passed. Additionally, a list of which remedies are conditional on others (for instance a ban that should only be implemented if a mentorship should fail), and so on. Arbitrators should not pass the motion until they are satisfied with the implementation notes.

Vote

Four net "support" votes needed to close case (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first motion is normally the fastest a case will close.