Arbitration report

The Report On Lengthy Litigation

The Arbitration Committee did not close any cases this week. A motion did pass, however, in a prior case.

Xed motion passes

A motion in the prior case against Xed, to place the user on personal attack parole indefinitely, passed with 5 support votes and no opposition. Xed was placed on personal attack parole in an earlier case, but that remedy lapsed in March 2006.

Other cases

No new cases were accepted this week.

Cases involving users SqueakBox and Zapatancas, Monicasdude (user page), Messhermit (user page), and Jacrosse (user page) are in the evidence phase.

Cases involving Marcosantezana (user page), users DarrenRay and 2006BC, Terryeo (user page), FourthAve (user page), editors on Depleted uranium, Aucaman (user page), Agapetos angel (user page), Locke Cole (user page), and Lou franklin (user page) are in the voting phase.

A motion to close is on the table in the case involving editors on Bible verse articles.


+ Add a comment

Discuss this story

These comments are automatically transcluded from this article's talk page. To follow comments, add the page to your watchlist. If your comment has not appeared here, you can try purging the cache.

Re:"Xed motion passes"

For the record, User:Dmcdevit blocked me for a week, saying that I violated my "arbcom-imposed parole". In fact. there was no "arbcom-imposed parole". They only thing he could have meant expired in early March. Realising his mistake, a very quick vote took place, which imposed a new indefinite parole. In other words, the outcome of the arbitration case was changed retroactively in order to cover up a mistake. Some people have different standards of integrity I guess. All this for saying the word "crap" apparently. A search shows hundreds of other users need to be banned for this heinous crime....

-Xed 11:06, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]




       

The Signpost · written by many · served by Sinepost V0.9 · 🄯 CC-BY-SA 4.0