User:JohnBronson/SA

Reply to other possible solutions

 * Now that I am actually back from Christmas shopping, I can add some bits here :O)
 * The purpose of this RFAR is not necessarily, to seek for a community ban, but if that is the end result, then that is the end result. We know that SA is a valued contributor and a great editor -- when the user is civil and doesn't resort to personal attacks and characterizations. In this line of work, where the stakes can be high and the content fairly important to defend, I can understand that being heated every once in a while may be understandable -- but we have been presented with an editor who has done this for quite a long time with little recourse despite all of the attempts made through past mediations, arbitrations, incident reports and so forth.
 * To be short, civility and personal attacks are the concerns, not the content.
 * That said, I would be satisfied if this matter was resolved in a similar fashion to the MartinPhi-SA Arbitration case; as pointed out elsewhere, this has become one of the more used results as of late. seicer  &#x007C;  talk  &#x007C;  contribs  02:04, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Reply regarding the death threat

 * Remarking about the death threat that, while comical, was in violation of a core policy. In the policy, it explictly states, "There is no bright-line rule about what constitutes a personal attack as opposed to constructive discussion, but some types of comments are never acceptable: [...] Threats of violence or other off-wiki action (particularly death threats)."
 * I don't take SA's death threat to be credible; in fact, it's downright laughable. I have, however, dealt with death threats on numerous occasions from various IP addresses on WP. And as has been demonstrated time and time again, it's always best to escalate these realistic threats with calls to various law enforcement, school and so forth as is customary and standard to gain results and to resolve the matter in a beneficial manner.
 * Not that this laughable death threat required that. But I am quite aware of what constitutes a death threat, and although this was made with the most of humorous intentions, it's not funny when it's stacked up with the death threats that we receive on a weekly basis at WP that require administrator intervention. Some of the threats that I and others have worked over have been much more vague than SA's. seicer  &#x007C;  talk  &#x007C;  contribs  03:29, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Reply to DreamGuy

 * My intentions in my original outline above was not to state that I was owning a particular article post-mediation. Mediation is a two-way street and requires cooperation from all parties. Given the very messy and confabulated background for Cold Fusion, cooperation amongst party members was not only appreciated, but necessary if mediation was to proceed. If one party, after a period of time that mediation actually started, began to show an uncooperative attitude and then began throwing around incivil remarks regarding the mediator and others that are involved in the mediation process, then the mediator has the discretion to remove the participant from the mediation process or close the mediation. I chose the former, and after several months of discussions, a finalized solution to Cold Fusion was achieved amongst numerous individuals -- on both sides of the Cold Fusion debate.
 * Mediation, again, requires the cooperation and civility of all parties involved. Failure of one or both either results in an individual being removed, or mediation being closed. While the removal of one participant led to some discontent and some input that was not received, the article keeps moving on. seicer  &#x007C;  talk  &#x007C;  contribs  13:04, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Quote
""I think we really need to much more strongly insist on a pleasant work environment and ask people quite firmly not to engage in that kind of sniping and confrontational behavior. We also need to be very careful about the general mindset of "Yeah, he's a jerk but he does good work". The problem is when people act like that, they cause a lot of extra headache for a lot of people and drive away good people who don't feel like dealing with it. Those are the unseen consequences that we need to keep in mind." Authored by Jimbo Wales at 22:51 on 5 February 2008"