Warning: Contains GMOs

A new case was opened for ArbCom as the Genetically modified organisms case was accepted and opened on 28 September. The case is a combination of two requests: the first was the original GMO case that was filed by Looie496, while the second was a Clarification request on Pseudoscience made by Tryptofish. The main issues raised from the filing parties are policy disagreements and editor conduct. Edits wars, aggressive behavior accusations and calls for topic bans are said to have stemmed from fringe theories that GMOs are harmful. Looie496 is calling for discretionary sanctions to be placed on the subject. Discretionary sanctions have been used in controversial areas on the project such as Abortion, the Prophet Muhammad, Gun Control, and the Gender Gap Task Force.

The case is currently in its Evidence phase. With seventeen named parties in the case, it is expected that the phase will take a while before going to the Workshop. In the meantime, a temporary injunction has been enacted on all pages related to GMOs. The injunction will expire after the closure of the case. We'll keep everyone updated on future developments.

• Editor conduct in e-cigs articles – Workshop phase over and awaiting Proposed Decision phase.
• Palestine-Israel articles 3 – Workshop phase over and awaiting Proposed Decision phase.

• Liz appointed to full clerk: On 28 September a notice was posted seeking out editors who are interested in applying to be arbitration clerks. On 30 September, admin Liz, formerly a trainee clerk, was promoted to a full clerk. She is one of five currently active editors who are arbitration clerks.

Disclosure – Liz is currently a Copyeditor for the Signpost.

Next "Arbitration report" →

In this issue

7 October 2015 (all comments)

Op-ed

Traffic report

Featured content

Gallery

Arbitration report

Technology report

In the media

+ 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.

Seems pretty important to mention that the E-Cig proposed decision is over six weeks late, with almost complete radio silence from every arb assigned to it. It's a disgrace. Parabolist (talk) 09:00, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Might be worth writing about next issue. Thanks for the tip. GamerPro64 13:42, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]