| Revision as of 23:51, 22 September 2006 editInkSplotch (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users821 editsm →Arbitration case← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 00:59, 26 June 2023 edit undoFastily (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled100,543 edits cleaned up bot spamTag: Replaced | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ⚫ | #REDIRECT ] | ||
| Old messages are at | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| == Please leave new messages at the foot of the page == | |||
| == Arbitration case == | |||
| An arbitration case has been submitted to review the actions surround the recent Giano case on AN. I've listed you as an involved party, and you may wish to view the case ]. --] 18:04, 22 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :You wouldn't believe me, Giano, but I expected repraisals from minute to minute all day long. I may imagine their panic after you returned to normal editing today. Now there's gonna be a huge bazaar... --<font color="FC4339">]</font> <sup><font color="C98726">]</font></sup> 19:05, 22 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::I honestly don't know how you mean this statement. I'm not trying to launch or extend attacks on anyone, but many have wanted ArbCom to speak on their own behalf throughout this and I felt it was time. Giano, your statement on the arbitration page is rather cryptic, and I was hoping to encourage you to express fully what you feel right now. I don't think ''anything'' is a foregone conclusion at this point (i.e., this isn't a kangaroo court), and the only way we'll be able to sort this all out is to express our views fully, in a neutral forum. --] 23:50, 22 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 00:59, 26 June 2023
Redirect to: