It was brought to my attention that Ruy Lopez twice reverted the article on Joseph Stalin without discussing said reverts on the talk page. According to remedy #4 of the aforementioned arbcom case "Gzornenplatz, Shorne, and VeryVerily, and Ruy Lopez are required to discuss all reverts on the relavant talk page, with the goal of finding mutually acceptable compromises." This he did not do.
The enforcement section states that: 1) If Gzornenplatz, Shorne, or VeryVerily should revert a page more than once per day, an administrator may ban him for up to 24 hours.
2) If Gzornenplatz, Shorne, or VeryVerily should revert a page without discussing it on the relevant talk page, an administrator may ban him for up to 24 hours.
This is an impossible situation. If there is no option for enforcement, then remedy #4 cannot apply to Ruy Lopez. I am concerned about what I think is a serious oversight on the part of the Arbitration Committee. I blocked Ruy Lopez for 24 hours based on my interpretation of arbcom's intent. If I should not have done this I apologize in advance and will unblock Ruy post-haste. I felt it necessary to bring this matter to the community's attention as quickly and publicly as possible.
-Charles Fulton
This is an impossible situation. If there is no option for enforcement, then remedy #4 cannot apply to Ruy Lopez. I am concerned about what I think is a serious oversight on the part of the Arbitration Committee.
This anomaly was actually pointed out earlier by Boraczek on talk pages, and Mav's airy response looked to me like a reluctance to admit the ArbCom (and he) had made yet another mistake in their rushing through of this unconsidered decision.
I say the ArbCom but mostly it was just Mav and Raul, as the others contributed little more than simply signing on. Such low participation makes it far more likely this sort of error will slip through. I hope the newly elected arbitrators regard themselves as having more of a role than being a warm body.
VV