| Revision as of 12:21, 18 August 2011 editAlexandrDmitri (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users8,569 edits →Workshop before evidence?: comment← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:05, 18 August 2011 edit undoBobthefish2 (talk | contribs)2,027 edits →Workshop before evidence?: reNext edit → | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| : I don't know if there's a procedure. People normally start with the evidence stage. ] (]) 11:58, 18 August 2011 (UTC) | : I don't know if there's a procedure. People normally start with the evidence stage. ] (]) 11:58, 18 August 2011 (UTC) | ||
| ::In my experience as an Arbitration Committee clerk, workshop proposals are expexted to be evidence-based, backed up by diffs. ] (]) 12:21, 18 August 2011 (UTC) | ::In my experience as an Arbitration Committee clerk, workshop proposals are expexted to be evidence-based, backed up by diffs. ] (]) 12:21, 18 August 2011 (UTC) | ||
| :::Well, can you list the specific steps of doing this in point form then? I simply followed Tenmei's example since he had some prior experiences with ArbCom. I would've provided evidence as well, but I don't feel like doing the digging now and I can see other parties are not very enthusiastic about this either (seeing how the evidence page is empty except for Penwhale's non-evidence materials. --] (]) 21:05, 18 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 21:05, 18 August 2011
Main case page (Talk) — Evidence (Talk) — Workshop (Talk) — Proposed decision (Talk)Case clerk: TBD Drafting arbitrator: TBD
| Misplaced Pages Arbitration |
|---|
 |
| Open proceedings |
| Active sanctions |
| Arbitration Committee |
Audit
|
| Track related changes |
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.
Workshop before evidence?
I'm new to arbitration...is it normal to start Workshopping before Evidence is presented? Or is this not a sequential process (that is, are they supposed to be done simultaneously)? It doesn't matter to me, but I guess I'm just confused about where to proceed first. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:01, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
- I don't know if there's a procedure. People normally start with the evidence stage. John Smith's (talk) 11:58, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
- In my experience as an Arbitration Committee clerk, workshop proposals are expexted to be evidence-based, backed up by diffs. Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 12:21, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
- Well, can you list the specific steps of doing this in point form then? I simply followed Tenmei's example since he had some prior experiences with ArbCom. I would've provided evidence as well, but I don't feel like doing the digging now and I can see other parties are not very enthusiastic about this either (seeing how the evidence page is empty except for Penwhale's non-evidence materials. --Bobthefish2 (talk) 21:05, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
- In my experience as an Arbitration Committee clerk, workshop proposals are expexted to be evidence-based, backed up by diffs. Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 12:21, 18 August 2011 (UTC)