Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Editor conduct in e-cigs articles/Proposed decision: Difference between revisions

< Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration | Requests | Case | Editor conduct in e-cigs articles Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 22:32, 15 September 2015 view sourceThryduulf (talk \| contribs)Oversighters, Administrators98,871 edits →S Marshall: apologies← Previous edit		Revision as of 22:47, 15 September 2015 view source S Marshall (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers32,393 edits Perhaps...Next edit →
Line 9:		Line 9:
	I'm sorry, I'm unfamiliar with Arbcom. Is this long silence normal?—] <small>]/]</small> 21:46, 15 September 2015 (UTC)		I'm sorry, I'm unfamiliar with Arbcom. Is this long silence normal?—] <small>]/]</small> 21:46, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
	:No, and I apologise for it. I had a couple of unexpected periods of inactivity recently which means I haven't had the time to read everything I need to read (the best part of a week with only very limited (and only insecure) internet access means I'm backlogged with many things), Euryalus is officially inactive (I can't remember whether the reason is public or not) and DGG has also been less active than usual recently - as have most of us actually. Realistically I'm not going to have the necessary time to progress this case until next week at the earliest. ] (]) 22:32, 15 September 2015 (UTC)		:No, and I apologise for it. I had a couple of unexpected periods of inactivity recently which means I haven't had the time to read everything I need to read (the best part of a week with only very limited (and only insecure) internet access means I'm backlogged with many things), Euryalus is officially inactive (I can't remember whether the reason is public or not) and DGG has also been less active than usual recently - as have most of us actually. Realistically I'm not going to have the necessary time to progress this case until next week at the earliest. ] (]) 22:32, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
			::Okay. I see that QuackGuru has resumed his very active editing of the article in the meantime. Perhaps some kind of temporary injunction might be in order while we wait?—] <small>]/]</small> 22:47, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:47, 15 September 2015

This page is for statements regarding the proposed decision, not discussion.
Therefore, with the exception of arbitrators and clerks, all editors must create a section for their statement and comment only in their own section.

Main case page (Talk) — Evidence (Talk) — Workshop (Talk) — Proposed decision (Talk)

Case clerk: TBD Drafting arbitrator: TBD

Misplaced Pages Arbitration

About arbitration Talk Arbitration policy (CU/OS) Guide to arbitration Noticeboard + Talk Search archived proceedings Ban appeals Report
Open proceedings All open requests Case requests Clarification and Amendment requests Arbitrator motion requests Enforcement requests
Active sanctions Contentious topics (Log) General sanctions Editor sanctions
Arbitration Committee Discuss + Contact Members Procedures Elections Talk History Clerks + Talk Clerk procedures Conflict of interest reports
Audit Talk Statistics Talk Reports (pre-2016)

Track related changes
v t e

Behaviour on this page: Arbitration case pages exist to assist the Arbitration Committee in arriving at a fair, well-informed decision. You are required to act with appropriate decorum during this case. While grievances must often be aired during a case, you are expected to air them without being rude or hostile, and to respond calmly to allegations against you. Accusations of misbehaviour posted in this case must be proven with clear evidence (and otherwise not made at all). Editors who conduct themselves inappropriately during a case may be sanctioned by an arbitrator or clerk, without further warning, by being banned from further participation in the case, or being blocked altogether. Personal attacks against other users, including arbitrators or clerks, will be met with sanctions. Behavior during a case may also be considered by the committee in arriving at a final decision.

S Marshall

I'm sorry, I'm unfamiliar with Arbcom. Is this long silence normal?—S Marshall T/C 21:46, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

No, and I apologise for it. I had a couple of unexpected periods of inactivity recently which means I haven't had the time to read everything I need to read (the best part of a week with only very limited (and only insecure) internet access means I'm backlogged with many things), Euryalus is officially inactive (I can't remember whether the reason is public or not) and DGG has also been less active than usual recently - as have most of us actually. Realistically I'm not going to have the necessary time to progress this case until next week at the earliest. Thryduulf (talk) 22:32, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Okay. I see that QuackGuru has resumed his very active editing of the article in the meantime. Perhaps some kind of temporary injunction might be in order while we wait?—S Marshall T/C 22:47, 15 September 2015 (UTC)