Youreallycan request for arbitration

A request for arbitration was filed late last week, ending the three-week long absence of pending cases.

Prioryman filed a request for arbitration concerning Youreallycan, alleging misconduct. In his arbitration request, Prioryman alleged that Youreallycan "has a persistent problem with personal attacks and edit-warring" and highlighted the latter's block record. He alleged that Youreallycan had made further personal attacks and engaged in edit-warring during the RfC/U, and on Prioryman's own user talk page, and requested that the Arbitration Committee resolve the matter. Youreallycan, however, noted that Prioryman had opened a request for comment on Youreallycan's conduct just a week previously. Other editors noted the same, with Collect commenting "Actions here while such an RfC/U is ongoing are premature, and may have the effect of being aimed more at harming an editor than of seeking a collegial and collaborative environment."

Discussion of the motion regarding annotation of changed usernames in case pages and the current requests for clarification and amendment has been inactive this last week.

← Previous "Arbitration report"

Next "Arbitration report" →

In this issue

13 August 2012 (all comments)

Op-ed

News and notes

Arbitration report

Featured content

Technology report

WikiProject report

Discussion report

+ 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.

• While it may be unkind to lambast the person bringing the case, it is certainly true that policy is that ArbCom is the venue of last resort. I was under the impression from email received that ArbCom was set to turn this case down at this time, for this very reason, and, while I have sympathy for some of those complaining about YRC's behaviour, was pleased that at last ArbCom seemed to be handling something correctly. Alas! The majority of Arbitrators so far are voting accept, once again making a mockery of the intended purposes of the Committee. Rich Farmbrough, 22:03, 15 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]