This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tealwisp (talk | contribs) at 06:26, 15 March 2009 (we're on hold, I'll let you know when we're back on). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 06:26, 15 March 2009 by Tealwisp (talk | contribs) (we're on hold, I'll let you know when we're back on)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)This dispute originated at Talk:Aspartame controversy#Proposal to work for consensus on purpose/focus of this article
Misplaced Pages talk:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2009-03/Aspartame controversy/Archive 1
Hello, everyone, I'll be mediating this issue. To start, I'd like a summary of what each side proposes/believes, and I'd like an explanation of why people are talking about sockpuppets. Have they been a problem?
Furthermore, I'd like to lay some ground rules:
- Assume good faith
- Be civil
- Focus on the issue at hand, not on whomever brought it up
- Be constructive; don't post unless you want to contribute to discussion
- Any accusations of sockpuppetry against those who have been proven not to be puppets or puppeteers may be considered personal attacks
We are in "timeout" for a while. It will end once everyone has cooled down a bit, and then we can get back to establishing consensus on where the article is headed. I suggest that everyone go from this proposal. Consider its merits, its lack thereof, its applicability, whatever. Just stay on topic. Tealwisp (talk) 06:26, 15 March 2009 (UTC)