Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Libertas/Proposed decision

all proposed

Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or abstain.
 * Only items that receive a majority aye vote will be enacted.
 * Items that receive a majority nay vote will be formally rejected.
 * Items that do not receive a majority aye or nay vote will be open to possible amendment by any Arbitrator if he so chooses. After the amendment process is complete, the item will be voted on one last time.
 * Items that receive a majority abstentions will need to go through an amendment process and be re-voted on once.

Conditional votes for or against and abstentions should be explained by the Arbitrator in parenthesis after his/her time-stamped signature. For example, an Arbitrator can state that he/she would only favor a particular remedy based on whether or not another remedy/remedies were enacted.

On this case, no arbitrators are recused and one is inactive, so 6 votes are a majority.

Ban on editing except in relation to this case
Enacted 1) Pending a final decision on this case, Libertas, Salazar, Ollieplatt, Razalah, Jennypratt, Suna, Dean12, Viewvista, Fylc, Billclinton, Anilingus,Nutrosnutros, and any other potential sockpuppet accounts of the above are prohibited from editing any pages except for those that relate to this case, their user pages, and their user talk pages. If this is violated, any or all of the above accounts may be blocked for up to 24 hours at the discretion of the administrators.


 * Aye:
 * Grunt 🇪🇺 01:45, 2005 Jan 22 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 02:09, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 02:34, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutralitytalk 03:16, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 03:38, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 13:11, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 16:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Nay:


 * Abstain:

Following official policy / no personal attacks / NPOV / 3RR
1) Contributors are expected to follow Wikipedia official policy, particularly the three-revert rule, prohibition against personal attacks, and neutral point of view policy. POV pushing, revert warring, and personal attacks will not be tolerated.


 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 04:17, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Grunt 🇪🇺 04:23, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC)
 * Ambi 01:57, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 13:14, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 02:09, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * &rarr;Raul654 03:39, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 16:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Nay:


 * Abstain:

Don't disrupt Wikipedia to make a point
2) Users should not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point; that is, users should not act in bad faith.


 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 04:17, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Grunt 🇪🇺 04:24, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC)
 * Ambi 01:57, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 13:14, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 02:09, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * &rarr;Raul654 03:39, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 16:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Nay:


 * Abstain:

Pointless RfCs/RfAs
3) Requests for comment and requests for arbitration should be used appropriately within the guidelines on that page. They should not be used for frivolous or pointless disputes and should not be used as a forum for personal attacks, harassment, and abuse.


 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 04:17, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Grunt 🇪🇺 04:53, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC)
 * Ambi 01:57, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 13:14, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 02:09, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * &rarr;Raul654 03:39, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 16:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Nay:


 * Abstain:

Sockpuppets
4) The use of sockpuppet accounts, while not generally forbidden, is discouraged. Abuse of sockpuppet accounts, such as using them to evade blocks and bans, make personal attacks or reverts, or vandalize, is strictly forbidden.


 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 04:17, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Grunt 🇪🇺 04:24, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC)
 * Ambi 01:57, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Users are permitted to have more than one account, but not for nefarious purposes Fred Bauder 12:13, Jan 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 02:09, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * &rarr;Raul654 03:39, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 16:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Nay:


 * Abstain:

Changing others' comments
5) A user may not edit another user's comments except to make insubstantial changes (such as archiving/moving, formatting, or correcting typos) or with express permission from the other user. (This does not apply to simple vandalism or spam.)


 * Aye:
 * &rarr;Raul654 03:21, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 03:27, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Note the addition. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 03:28, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC)
 * Neutralitytalk 03:32, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 13:53, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 16:02, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 16:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) Noting that User page includes talk pages in user pages, so those are covered by 6). Also, this obviously doesn't apply to simple vandalism or spam.


 * Nay:


 * Abstain:

Userpages
6) A user may say whatever he/she wants on his/her user page within reason (e.g. No personal attacks). Generally, you should avoid any substantial content on your user page that is unrelated to Wikipedia. (See User page.)


 * Aye:
 * &rarr;Raul654 03:21, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Upon rereading the evidence page... -- Grunt 🇪🇺 03:44, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC)
 * Neutralitytalk 03:56, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 13:54, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 16:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 18:15, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) (Only with my addition of "Generally, you should avoid any substantial content on your user page that is unrelated to Wikipedia.")
 * This guideline is now stated on User page :-) - David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Nay:


 * Abstain:
 * Very vague; perhaps unnecessary. Ambi 03:27, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't believe this is relevant to the case. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 03:30, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC)
 * Ditto. Neutralitytalk 03:32, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 16:02, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) (I'm pretty sure there is a user page policy somewhere)

Personal attacks
1) Libertas (and his associated sockpuppets) have made multiple personal attacks in violation of the no personal attacks policy. Libertas has personally attacked many users and groups of users&mdash;on talk pages and in edit summaries.


 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 04:34, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Grunt 🇪🇺 04:52, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC)
 * Ambi 01:57, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 14:06, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 02:09, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * &rarr;Raul654 03:39, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 16:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Nay:


 * Abstain:

POV editing
2) Libertas (and his associated sockpuppets) have made almost none of their edits from a neutral point of view.


 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 04:34, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Grunt 🇪🇺 04:52, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC)
 * Ambi 01:57, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 14:06, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 02:09, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * &rarr;Raul654 03:39, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 16:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Nay:


 * Abstain:

Revert warring
3) Libertas (and his associated sockpuppets) have made multiple reversions that were in violation of the three-revert rule.


 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 04:34, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Grunt 🇪🇺 04:52, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC)
 * Ambi 01:57, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 14:06, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 02:09, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * &rarr;Raul654 03:39, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 16:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Nay:


 * Abstain:

Disruption of Wikipedia to make a point / acting in bad faith / harassment
4) Libertas (and his associated sockpuppets) have disrupted Wikipedia to make a point and acted in bad faith. Specifically, Libertas made bad-faith edits to harass and retaliate against other users: submitting frivolous image copyright, submitting frivilous RfCs, voting on RfCs and VfDs in bad faith, spamming the Administrator's noticeboard, making baseless accusations of sockpuppetry, disrupting an unrelated Arbitration page. (see, generally, evidence of January 13–17).


 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 04:34, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Grunt 🇪🇺 04:52, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC)
 * Ambi 01:57, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 14:06, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 02:09, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * &rarr;Raul654 03:39, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 16:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Nay:


 * Abstain:

Sockpuppets
5) Salazar, Ollieplatt, Razalah, Jennypratt, Suna, Dean12, Viewvista, Fylc, Billclinton, Anilingus, and Nutrosnutros are all sockpuppet accounts of one user (as acknowledged by technical evidence), likely Libertas, which have been used to further the above disputes. Furthermore, several of the sockpuppets violate the username policy.


 * Aye:
 * Grunt 🇪🇺 04:52, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC)
 * Neutralitytalk 04:57, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 01:57, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * But note that technical evidence is lacking regarding Libertas Fred Bauder 02:14, Jan 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * The behaviour is pretty telling IMO - David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 02:09, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * &rarr;Raul654 03:39, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 16:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Nay:


 * Abstain:

Remedies
proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on

Ban for disruptive behaviour
1) User:Libertas, Salazar, Ollieplatt, Razalah, Jennypratt, Suna, Dean12, Viewvista, Fylc, Billclinton, Anilingus, and Nutrosnutros (hereafter called Libertas and associated sockpuppets) are banned for one year from editing Wikipedia for disruptive behaviour.


 * Aye:
 * Grunt 🇪🇺 02:08, 2005 Jan 19 (UTC)
 * Ambi 02:22, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutralitytalk 02:32, Jan 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 02:45, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * &rarr;Raul654 03:39, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 13:58, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 16:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) And this is quite a remarkable achievement.


 * Nay:


 * Abstain:

Revert limitation
2) Libertas and associated sockpuppets are limited to one revert per twenty-four hour period; should this be violated they will be banned for up to twenty-four hours.


 * Aye:
 * Grunt 🇪🇺 02:10, 2005 Jan 19 (UTC)
 * Ambi 02:22, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutralitytalk 02:32, Jan 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 02:09, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * &rarr;Raul654 03:39, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 13:58, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 16:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Nay:


 * Abstain:

Sockpuppet accounting
3) Libertas must keep a list on his user page of all accounts and IPs from which he edits. Failure to do so will result in a temporary ban (up to one week) from editing Wikipedia for Libertas. Such sockpuppets made by Libertas will be banned.


 * Aye:
 * Grunt 🇪🇺 02:13, 2005 Jan 19 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 13:09, Jan 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 02:09, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Nay:
 * In favor of 3.1. &rarr;Raul654 03:39, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * In favor of 3.1. Neutralitytalk 03:55, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * In favor of 3.1. Ambi 04:17, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * In favour of 3.1. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 04:41, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 16:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) 3.1


 * Abstain:

Sockpuppet accounting
3.1) Libertas is prohibited from having any sockpuppet accounts. Prior to this ban taking effect Libertas or any of the above sockpuppets may choose one and only one account to be declared a "primary account"; the rest will be considered sockpuppet accounts and will be infinitely blocked. If such a declaration is not made within 24 hours after the case closes, the primary account shall be assumed to be Ollieplatt. A violation of this prohibition will result in a month-long ban per violation, to run consecutively, that may be imposed by any administrator.


 * &rarr;Raul654 03:39, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutralitytalk 03:55, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:17, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Please note the addition. Grunt 🇪🇺 04:41, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 13:56, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 16:03, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 16:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Nay:


 * Abstain:

Identity of user
4) These remedies are phrased in terms of User:Libertas, but apply to all the accounts of the user behind the listed accounts. For example, should Libertas never edit again (or prove to be a different user) these remedies continue to apply to the accounts as a group and they should pick a principal account to edit with, where, for example, a list of accounts would be maintained.


 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 13:33, Jan 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * Grunt 🇪🇺 14:44, 2005 Jan 19 (UTC)
 * Ambi 14:55, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutralitytalk 03:04, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 02:09, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * I think this is implicit in all arbitration committee findings. &rarr;Raul654 03:40, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 16:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Nay:


 * Abstain:

One user account
5) Following any ban "Libertas and associated sockpuppets" shall edit under one clearly identified account. All sockpuppets will be banned.


 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 13:38, Jan 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * Grunt 🇪🇺 14:50, 2005 Jan 19 (UTC)
 * mav 02:09, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Nay:
 * In favor of 3.1. &rarr;Raul654 04:02, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:17, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * In favor of 3.1. Neutralitytalk 03:08, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * This is effectively equivalent to 3.1, and I like 3.1's wording better. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 04:51, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 16:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 20:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) 3.1 states it better.


 * Abstain:

Enforcement
None; see remedies

Motion to close
Four Aye votes needed to close case

I move to close. All that is likely to pass has been passed, and I think all have had a chance to vote. Neutralitytalk 17:03, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutralitytalk 17:03, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Now that Princple 6 is looked at. Vote not effective until 17:03 27 Jan 2005 UTC. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 17:56, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC)
 * mav 18:16, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) ( Princple 6 now has majority; vote not effective until 17:03 27 Jan 2005 UTC)
 * sannse (talk) 18:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) (vote not effective until 17:03 27 Jan 2005 UTC)
 * &#10149;the Epopt 19:14, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * &rarr;Raul654 19:29, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)