| Revision as of 11:31, 11 May 2015 editRoger Davies (talk | contribs)Administrators34,587 edits case management← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 21:50, 8 August 2020 edit undoNewyorkbrad (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators45,481 edits blankingTag: Replaced |
| (108 intermediate revisions by 28 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
__NOINDEX__ |
|
{{Casenav}} |
|
|
|
{{ombox |image=] |text= This page has been ]. }} |
|
{{tmbox |
|
|
| type = content |
|
|
| image = ] |
|
|
| text = <center><big>'''Comments on this page are to be sectioned, not threaded. With the exception of arbitrators and clerks, all editors must create a section for their statement and <u>comment only in their own section</u>.</big></center> |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{ivmbox|<big>''']'''</big> |
|
|
|
|
|
Because of the unusual number of participants with i-bans in this case, the consensus of the Arbitration Committee is that: |
|
|
|
|
|
1. All i-bans and associated restrictions are suspended for participation on the ]. This suspension extends solely and exclusively to the /Evidence page but some tolerance will be given on the ] to ''link'' to material on the /Evidence page. |
|
|
|
|
|
2. For simplicity, and for the purposes of this case only, one-way i-bans are regarded as two-way i-bans. |
|
|
|
|
|
3. Threaded interactions of any description between participants are prohibited on both the /Evidence and the /Evidence talk pages. |
|
|
|
|
|
4. Similar arrangements will apply to ] and the ].<p> |
|
|
] <sup>]</sup> 11:29, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
}} |
|
