Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:15, 6 February 2005

all proposed

Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or abstain.

• Only items that receive a majority aye vote will be enacted.
• Items that receive a majority nay vote will be formally rejected.
• Items that do not receive a majority aye or nay vote will be open to possible amendment by any Arbitrator if he so chooses. After the amendment process is complete, the item will be voted on one last time.
• Items that receive a majority abstentions will need to go through an amendment process and be re-voted on once.

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 enacted.

On this case, no arbitrators are recused and one is inactive, so 6 votes are a majority.

Proposed temporary injunctions

Four net aye votes needed to pass (each nay vote subtracts an aye)

Template

1) {text of proposed injunction}

Aye:

Nay:

Abstain:

Not banning Gz

Enacted Admins are instructed not to block Gzornenplatz as a Wik reincarnation for the duration of the arbcom proceeding.

Aye:

1. →Raul654 21:16, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)
2. Grunt 🇪🇺 21:22, 2005 Jan 29 (UTC)
3. sannse (talk) 21:25, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC) vote to take effect without the usual 24 hour wait
4. mav 21:27, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC) (echo Sannse)
5. Neutrality 22:29, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)
6. Ambi 22:30, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
7. →Raul654 14:15, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)

Nay:

Abstain:

Proposed principles

proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on

Sockpuppets

1) The use of sockpuppet accounts, while not generally forbidden, is discouraged. Abuse of sockpuppet accounts, such as using them to evade blocks and bans, make personal attacks or reverts, or vandalize, is strictly forbidden.

Aye:

1. This is beginning to look familliar by now... -- Grunt 🇪🇺 00:43, 2005 Feb 6 (UTC)
2. mav 01:14, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
3. David Gerard 01:23, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
4. Fred Bauder 01:25, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
5. sannse (talk) 01:32, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
6. Ambi 01:36, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
7. Neutrality 03:35, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
8. ➥the Epopt 13:48, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
9. →Raul654 14:15, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)

Nay:

Abstain:

Redemption

2) All banned editors are theoretically redeemable. The canonical example is Michael, who was hard-banned as a persistent vandal but has since reformed and become a good editor.

Aye:

1. David Gerard 01:23, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
2. Fred Bauder 01:25, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
3. sannse (talk) 01:32, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
4. Ambi 01:36, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
5. Grunt 🇪🇺 01:53, 2005 Feb 6 (UTC)
6. mav 03:18, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
7. Neutrality 03:35, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
8. ➥the Epopt 13:48, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
9. →Raul654 14:15, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)

Nay:

Abstain:

Proposed findings of fact

proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on

Gzornenplatz = Wik

1) Gzornenplatz, as shown by technical and other evidence, is Wik.

Aye:

1. Grunt 🇪🇺 00:43, 2005 Feb 6 (UTC)
2. mav 01:11, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
3. David Gerard 01:23, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
4. Fred Bauder 01:25, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
5. sannse (talk) 01:32, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
6. Ambi 01:36, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
7. Neutrality 03:35, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
8. ➥the Epopt 13:48, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
9. →Raul654 14:15, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)

Nay:

Abstain:

Wik's ban

2) Jimbo Wales has stated that Wik is under a hard ban., (he clarified this on IRC)

Aye:

1. This was done via IRC to the arbitrators. Grunt 🇪🇺 00:43, 2005 Feb 6 (UTC)
2. mav 01:09, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
3. David Gerard 01:23, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
4. Fred Bauder 01:25, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
5. sannse (talk) 01:32, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
6. Ambi 01:36, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
7. Neutrality 03:35, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
8. ➥the Epopt 13:48, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
9. →Raul654 14:15, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)

Nay:

Abstain:

Assumption of good faith

3) Jimbo Wales has stated to the Arbitration Committee on the subject of Gzornenplatz, "I long suspected this was Wik, and ignored evidence to the contrary out of a spirit of goodwill and a hope for reform. And when he told me to my face (in IRC) that he wasn't Wik, I chose to believe him despite my doubts. I ended up disappointed." The Arbitration Committee followed Jimbo's lead in this.

Aye:

1. David Gerard 01:23, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
2. Fred Bauder 01:25, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
3. sannse (talk) 01:32, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC) (added arbcom clarification)
4. Ambi 01:36, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
5. Grunt 🇪🇺 01:54, 2005 Feb 6 (UTC)
6. mav 03:18, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
7. Neutrality 03:35, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
8. ➥the Epopt 13:48, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
9. →Raul654 14:15, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)

Nay:

Abstain:

Proposed decision

Remedies

proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on

Extension of ban

1) The ban previously applied to Wik is explicitly noted to apply to Gzornenplatz. Gzornenplatz is reminded that he may appeal the ban to Jimbo Wales or to the Arbitration Committee, via e-mail, IRC, or other means of contact outside of Misplaced Pages.

Aye:

1. Grunt 🇪🇺 00:43, 2005 Feb 6 (UTC)
2. mav 01:04, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC) (I added 'or to the ArbCom')
3. David Gerard 01:23, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
4. Fred Bauder 01:25, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
5. sannse (talk) 01:32, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
6. Ambi 01:36, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
7. Neutrality 03:35, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
8. ➥the Epopt 13:48, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Nay:

Abstain:

1. →Raul654 14:15, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC) - I'd like some clarification. First, does this refer to the hard ban mentioned in FoF 2? If so, it should say 'hard ban'. →Raul654 14:15, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)

Enforcement

proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Aye:

Nay:

Abstain:

Discussion by Arbitrators

General

Motion to close

Four Aye votes needed to close case