David Gerard writes: on another I think this is an important issue. While I would like the arbitration committee to be somewhat faster, taking our time over 'first-time offenders' at least makes sure that a considered decision is reached. However, I do think that subsequent violations after one banning should be rather more fast-track than that. If a user is 'violating their probation' by doing the exact same thing they did last time -- I don't see the complexity. I do see an appearance of toothlessness. -Morven

David Gerard wrote You don't, to me, sound churlish. But you can't _really_ expect an answer, prejudging this ... ? Charles

When the person who edits Wikipedia under the user name Mr. Natural Health returns to Wikipedia after his ban he gets a fair chance to start over. That he may be unable or unwilling to take advantage of this opportunity can be anticipated but it is not outside the range of human possibility that he will simply return and get down to the basically enjoyable business of editing rather than engaging in the past pattern of argument and insult. It would probably help him out if he would choose a new user name. If he does that and things go well there is no way a Wikipedia user could even tell he was back. Should the prior destructive pattern resume the response of the arbitration committee can be expected to be swift and decisive. It can be anticipated that Mr. Natural Health/3, should it be necessary, would probably result in a permanent ban from editing health related articles. Fred