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]]
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 2:58 AM, Jonathan Hughes lifebaka@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 CatIt 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@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 abovehttp://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Wikinews%3AAdministrators&diff=633208&oldid=633206the 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