Revision as of 18:31, 16 May 2008 editSlimVirgin (talk | contribs)172,064 edits →Question from FT2← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:39, 16 May 2008 edit undoJohn Vandenberg (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users68,507 edits →Question from FT2: grumble; yes, ill figure something outNext edit → | ||
Line 103: | Line 103: | ||
I ask since this might be an important factor in assessing the conduct of the parties, in a fair and informed way, and against an appropriate context. Or it might not. | I ask since this might be an important factor in assessing the conduct of the parties, in a fair and informed way, and against an appropriate context. Or it might not. | ||
'''Comments (if any) on the evidence page please.''' ] <sup><span style="font-style:italic">(] | ])</span></sup> 11:40, 16 May 2008 (UTC) | '''''Comments (if any) on the evidence page please.''''' ] <sup><span style="font-style:italic">(] | ])</span></sup> 11:40, 16 May 2008 (UTC) | ||
Line 118: | Line 118: | ||
::People may want to provide replies to your comments/evidence - and this is not the place for them. Ideally, FT2's comment probably should not have been made here, to avoid confusion for those who would not understand. In any case, a clerk will remove these comments soon. ] (]) 15:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC) | ::People may want to provide replies to your comments/evidence - and this is not the place for them. Ideally, FT2's comment probably should not have been made here, to avoid confusion for those who would not understand. In any case, a clerk will remove these comments soon. ] (]) 15:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC) | ||
::::<small>Oh my, it is back here again; what joy. And now after everyone else has clerked the case, I am being told ''a clerk'' will un-kink it all. <span style="font-variant:small-caps">] <sup>'''(])'''</sup></span> 18:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)</small> | |||
:::Well then, when I present my complete evidence, I'll probably incorporate that comment into my entire evidence presentation. ] (]) 15:36, 16 May 2008 (UTC) | :::Well then, when I present my complete evidence, I'll probably incorporate that comment into my entire evidence presentation. ] (]) 15:36, 16 May 2008 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 18:39, 16 May 2008
This is a page for working on Arbitration decisions. The Arbitrators, parties to the case, and other editors may draft proposals and post them to this page for review and comments. Proposals may include proposed general principles, findings of fact, remedies, and enforcement provisions—the same format as is used in Arbitration Committee decisions. The bottom of the page may be used for overall analysis of the /Evidence and for general discussion of the case.
Any user may edit this workshop page. Please sign all suggestions and comments. Arbitrators will place proposed items they believe should be part of the final decision on the /Proposed decision page, which only Arbitrators may edit, for voting.
Motions and requests by the parties
Template
1)
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
2)
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
3)
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Proposed temporary injunctions
Template
1)
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
2)
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
3)
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
4)
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Questions to the parties
Question from FT2
One question that seems important to check with all parties and anyone else:
It might be helpful to give some (simple) wiki-historic background on these matters (so to speak) and "how it reached where it is now", in addition to the usual discussion of the parties' conduct (how they have acted and its impact).
By that I mean, without setting out a fishing net or any kind of wild conspiracy-building, it might be useful to have a couple of comments on the extent to which this is about the conduct of specific individuals, and the extent (if any) to which the problematic conduct(s) are also driven by the playing out of some kind of underlying issue, dispute or division, such as groups, cliques, historic conflicts, or opposing agendas/viewpoints (if any).
I ask since this might be an important factor in assessing the conduct of the parties, in a fair and informed way, and against an appropriate context. Or it might not.
Comments (if any) on the evidence page please. FT2 11:40, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- Further thought: Where possible I'd encourage those giving evidence (on either "side") to ensure they also give consideration to good faith explanations, as necessary. Whilst we're ultimately looking at users' conduct and its impact here, not every problematic action will have been undertaken for a disruptive or hostile reason. Up-front request for a good quality, reasoned discussion. FT2 12:06, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- To ensure communication is reasonably clear, it might also be useful if those providing such a 'background' assume that anyone reading through the background has had no prior dealings with those involved, and have little to no idea about the dispute. Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:18, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, I'm kind of surprised by your question, FT2, because I thought I was fairly clear about things here in a case in which you were a sitting arbitrator. As far as FM's involvement, FM has joined with SV in previous personal attacks on editors that they've been at odds with . Cla68 (talk) 14:30, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- Not everyone is as aware of all that's known and said. It'd be risky to assume evidence and comments for one case are also fine tuned for another, or that all participants who might want to follow the case or give evidence will be aware of that section in a previous case. It's safer to assume not. FT2 17:36, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, I'm kind of surprised by your question, FT2, because I thought I was fairly clear about things here in a case in which you were a sitting arbitrator. As far as FM's involvement, FM has joined with SV in previous personal attacks on editors that they've been at odds with . Cla68 (talk) 14:30, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if my reply should have been moved to the evidence page. My reply was meant as a direct response to FT2. My evidence, when presented, will be intended for the entire ArbCom and interested observers, not just for FT2. If I had known that my response would be moved, I might done it differently. Now, it may be out of context. Cla68 (talk) 15:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- I have returned the answer to FT2's question here, because it's not evidence. It would be good if the evidence page could be reserved for evidence, and this page for discussion and questions. SlimVirgin 18:31, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- People may want to provide replies to your comments/evidence - and this is not the place for them. Ideally, FT2's comment probably should not have been made here, to avoid confusion for those who would not understand. In any case, a clerk will remove these comments soon. Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- Oh my, it is back here again; what joy. And now after everyone else has clerked the case, I am being told a clerk will un-kink it all. John Vandenberg 18:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- Well then, when I present my complete evidence, I'll probably incorporate that comment into my entire evidence presentation. Cla68 (talk) 15:36, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Proposed final decision
Proposals by User:Ncmvocalist
tbn = to be numbered.
Proposed principles
Purpose of Misplaced Pages
1) The purpose of Misplaced Pages is to create a high-quality, free-content encyclopedia in an atmosphere of camaraderie and mutual respect among contributors. Use of the site for other purposes, such as advocacy or propaganda, furtherance of outside conflicts, publishing or promoting original research, and political or ideological struggle, is prohibited.
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
- Standard. Ncmvocalist (talk) 14:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Decorum
2) Misplaced Pages users are expected to behave reasonably, calmly, and courteously in their interactions with other users; to approach even difficult situations in a dignified fashion and with a constructive and collaborative outlook; and to avoid acting in a manner that brings the project into disrepute. Unseemly conduct, such as personal attacks, incivility, assumptions of bad faith, trolling, harassment, disruptive point-making, and gaming the system, is prohibited.
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
- Standard. Ncmvocalist (talk) 14:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages is a community-generated encyclopedia
3) Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia that exists because of the community that creates it and maintains it. Because the community generates the majority of the encyclopedia's content, disagreements between editors occur. But if these disagreements are asserted in a context of bad faith, cynicism, and inter-personal animosity, editors suffer, the spirit of collaboration suffers, and ultimately the encyclopedia suffers.
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
- Proposed. I can be said better, I am sure, but it is key to this case. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:53, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Proposed findings of fact
Template
1) {text of proposed finding of fact}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
2) {text of proposed finding of fact}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
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}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
2) {text of proposed remedy}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Proposed enforcement
Template
1) {text of proposed enforcement}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
2) {text of proposed enforcement}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Proposals by User:Y
Proposed principles
Template
1) {text of Proposed principle}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
2) {text of Proposed principle}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Proposed findings of fact
Template
1) {text of proposed finding of fact}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
2) {text of proposed finding of fact}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
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}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
2) {text of proposed remedy}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Proposed enforcement
Template
1) {text of proposed enforcement}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
2) {text of proposed enforcement}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Proposals by User:Z
Proposed principles
Template
1) {text of Proposed principle}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
2) {text of Proposed principle}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Proposed findings of fact
Template
1) {text of proposed finding of fact}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
2) {text of proposed finding of fact}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
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}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
2) {text of proposed remedy}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Proposed enforcement
Template
1) {text of proposed enforcement}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
2) {text of proposed enforcement}
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Analysis of evidence
Place here items of evidence (with diffs) and detailed analysis
Template
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
Template
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others:
General discussion
- Comment by Arbitrators:
- Comment by parties:
- Comment by others: