| Revision as of 01:37, 28 September 2007 editKirill Lokshin (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users75,365 edits →Sockpuppets← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:53, 3 October 2007 edit undoFloNight (talk | contribs)Administrators20,015 edits →Proposed principles: ; votes and thoughtsNext edit → | ||
| Line 56: | Line 56: | ||
| :Oppose: | :Oppose: | ||
| :# True but not relevant to this particular case. ]] 14:53, 3 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :# | |||
| :Abstain: | :Abstain: | ||
| Line 82: | Line 82: | ||
| :Oppose: | :Oppose: | ||
| :# Not relevant here. There was substantial evidence that we were dealing with a sock. ] 17:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | :# Not relevant here. There was substantial evidence that we were dealing with a sock. ] 17:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :# True but not relevant to this particular case. There was plenty of evidence to support a CU. ]] 14:53, 3 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Abstain: | :Abstain: | ||
| Line 92: | Line 93: | ||
| :#] 17:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | :#] 17:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :# ] 01:37, 28 September 2007 (UTC) | :# ] 01:37, 28 September 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :# ]] 14:53, 3 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Oppose: | :Oppose: | ||
Revision as of 14:53, 3 October 2007
After considering /Evidence and discussing proposals with other Arbitrators, parties and others at /Workshop, Arbitrators may place proposals which are ready for voting here. Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or abstain. Only items that receive a majority "support" vote will be passed. 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 passed. Only Arbitrators or Clerks should edit this page; non-Arbitrators may comment on the talk page.
For this case, there are 9 active Arbitrators, so 5 votes are a majority.
Motions and requests by the parties
Place those on /Workshop. Motions which are accepted for consideration and which require a vote will be placed here by the Arbitrators for voting.
Motions have the same majority for passage as the final decision.
Template
1) {text of proposed motion}
- Support:
- Oppose:
- Abstain:
Proposed temporary injunctions
Four net "support" votes needed to pass (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first vote is normally the fastest an injunction will be imposed.
Template
1) {text of proposed orders}
- Support:
- Oppose:
- Abstain:
Proposed final decision
Proposed principles
Courtesy
1) Misplaced Pages users are expected to behave reasonably and calmly in their dealings with other users. Insulting and intimidating other users harms the community by creating a hostile environment. Personal attacks are not acceptable.
- Oppose:
- True but not relevant to this particular case. FloNight♥♥♥ 14:53, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
- Abstain:
Assume good faith
2) Unless there is strong evidence to the contrary, assume that people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it. If criticism is needed, discuss editors' actions: but it is neither necessary nor productive to accuse others of harmful motives.
- Support:
- Oppose:
- True, but in this case the user raised alarm bells for many people. I do not think this principle should be our guiding principle for the case. FloNight♥♥♥ 19:19, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Not relevant Fred Bauder 17:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Abstain:
Fishing
3) Checkuser is not for fishing.
- Support:
- Oppose:
- Not relevant here. There was substantial evidence that we were dealing with a sock. Fred Bauder 17:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- True but not relevant to this particular case. There was plenty of evidence to support a CU. FloNight♥♥♥ 14:53, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
- Abstain:
Sockpuppets
4) Sockpuppets are subject to any restrictions placed on the previous account.
- Support:
- Oppose:
- Abstain:
Template
5) {text of proposed principle}
- Support:
- Oppose:
- Abstain:
Proposed findings of fact
Accusations of sockpuppetry
1) SevenOfDiamonds (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been repeatedly accused of being a sockpuppet of various users. Four checkuser attempts (Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/SixOfDiamonds, Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/SevenOfDiamonds, Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Giovanni33, Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Lovelight) have produced no evidence for this claim.
- Support:
- Oppose:
- Fred Bauder 17:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC) Obvious sock Fred Bauder 17:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Abstain:
Evidence of sockpuppetry
2) The evidence presented to support the assertion that SevenOfDiamonds is a reincarnation of a banned editor is largely circumstantial and insufficient to conclusively support the allegation.
- Support:
- Oppose:
- Obvious was a sockpuppet. Getting the who wrong is the aim of the sock. Seems clear to me now who it is. FloNight♥♥♥ 18:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC);
- Evidence is sufficient. Fred Bauder 17:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Abstain:
Harassment
3) SevenOfDiamonds and MONGO each accuse the other of harassment. Both are correct to some degree.
- Support:
- Oppose:
- Mostly SevenOfDiamonds Fred Bauder 17:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Abstain:
NuclearUmpf
4) NuclearUmpf (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is the indefinitely blocked alternative account of Zer0faults (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who is on probation under the remedies of Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Zer0faults#Remedies. He has expressed his intention to disrupt Misplaced Pages .
- Oppose:
- Abstain:
SevenOfDiamonds
5) SevenOfDiamonds (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) was indefinitely blocked by FayssalF (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) for "block evasion - obvious reincarnation of User:NuclearUmpf". After an inconclusive discussion, the action was reversed and the matter referred to arbitration. See discussions at User_talk:SevenOfDiamonds#Unblock and Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Arbitration_enforcement.
- Oppose:
- Abstain:
SevenOfDiamonds a sockpuppet
6) The evidence presented by MONGO demonstrates that it is more likely that not that SevenOfDiamonds is a sockpuppet of NuclearUmpf.
- Oppose:
- Abstain:
Template
7) {text of proposed finding of fact}
- Support:
- Oppose:
- Abstain:
Template
8) {text of proposed finding of fact}
- Support:
- Oppose:
- Abstain:
Template
9) {text of proposed finding of fact}
- Support:
- Oppose:
- Abstain:
Proposed remedies
Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.
SevenOfDiamonds restricted
1) SevenOfDiamonds (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) shall not interact with, or comment in any way (directly or indirectly) about, MONGO, on any page in Misplaced Pages. Should SevenOfDiamonds do so, he may be blocked for the duration specified in the enforcement ruling below.
- Support:
- Oppose:
- Wholly inadequate Fred Bauder 17:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Abstain:
MONGO restricted
2) MONGO (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) shall not interact with, or comment in any way (directly or indirectly) about, SevenOfDiamonds, on any page in Misplaced Pages. Should MONGO do so, he may be blocked for the duration specified in the enforcement ruling below.
- Support:
- Abstain:
SevenOfDiamonds
3) As a sockpuppet of an indefinitely banned user, SevenOfDiamonds is subject to the indefinite ban.
- Oppose:
- Abstain:
Proposed enforcement
Enforcement by block
1) Should any user subject to an editing restriction violate that restriction, they may be briefly blocked, up to a week in the event of repeated violations. After 5 blocks, the maximum block shall increase to one month. All blocks are to be logged at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/SevenOfDiamonds#Log of blocks and bans.
- Support:
- Oppose:
- Abstain:
Template
2) {text of proposed enforcement}
- Support:
- Oppose:
- Abstain:
Discussion by Arbitrators
General
Motion to close
Implementation notes
Clerks and Arbitrators should use this section to clarify their understanding of the final decision--at a minimum, a list of items that have passed. Additionally, a list of which remedies are conditional on others (for instance a ban that should only be implemented if a mentorship should fail), and so on. Arbitrators should not pass the motion until they are satisfied with the implementation notes.
Vote
Four net "support" votes needed to close case (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first motion is normally the fastest a case will close.