On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 2:58 AM, Jonathan Hughes <lifebaka(a)gmail.com> wrote:
If my intention was to run around that decision...
- Wouldn't it be easier for me to let time do its job and allow the
case
to be forgotten?
- Would it not be easier for me to get a new account to avoid the
remedies?
- This is something Davenbelle done several times with four large
accounts.
Please answer those two questions above. And then consider the ones
below.
Do you realize how non-plausible your argument is? Why do you work so
hard
to assume bad faith?
- White Cat
It seems like you want this for personal use, White Cat. If this is the
case, couldn't you just put a link on your userpage? This overall would be
an easier solution and would cause less trouble. Cheers.
[[w:User:Lifebaka]]
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Then people accuse me of obsessing about it. And this thread is not about
the spesific redirect in question. I tried that. It is very tiring to keep
trying to find arbcom cases via "what links here" pages.
Why does my creation of a redirect causing trouble? Enough to lead to a
out-of-process forceful deletion while avoiding discussion as much as
possible? What was there to make a deal of? Over a redirect? I cannot
imagine what would happen to me had I requested something of non trivial
nature...
I particularly find it disruptive when arbitrators decide to ignore
questions (particularly uncomfortable ones) posted to their talk pages.
People will certainly not drop matters so long as they get satisfactory
answers or results. Or of course people can drop the matter in frustration
and disgust. I seriously doubt arbcom was formed to disgust users away from
the project.
Why should anyone use any means of dispute resolution if arbitrators
themselves go out of their way to avoid it? Shouldn't the arbitrator use
rfd, rfc, 3O and ultimately rfar like they instruct us to use all the time?
If board members are not
above<http://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Wikinews%3AAdministrators…
policies and guidelines, neither are arbitrators. Arbitrators should
set
example to the rest of us particularly when dealing with disputes involving
themselves.
Even actual real-world legal cases including constitutional ones are subject
to criticism on free countries. I do not see why such criticism is banned on
the free encyclopedia? Criticizing arbcom will get you branded as a troll.
Concerns of the community should be addressed by arbcom. Arbcom lately tends
to go out of their way to ignore the concerns of the community or at least
give that impression.
All these seemingly unrelated issues are very related. Community trust
towards arbcom is declining, not increasing particularly among old timers
who know "how things work". Arbitrators themselves as well as the board
should be alarmed by this more than other people. It wouldn't be surprising
if people start completely ignoring arbcom and dispute resolution in not so
distant future.
- White Cat