Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Mr-Natural-Health/Proposed decision

all proposed

Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or vote to abstain.
 * Only items that receive a majority yay vote will be enacted.
 * Items that receive a majority nay vote will be formally rejected.
 * Items that do not receive a majority yay 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, against, or to abstain should be explained by the arbitrator in parenthesis after his time-stamped signature. For example, an arbitrator can state that he would only favor a particular remedy based on whether or not another remedy/remedies were enacted.

Proposed principles
proposed wording to be modified by arbitrators and then voted on

1) Wikiquette: Insulting and intimidating other users harms the community by creating a hostile working environment. All users are instructed to refrain from this activity. Admins are instructed to use good judgement while enforcing this policy. All users are encouraged to remove personal attacks on sight.


 * Arbitrator votes for proposed principle 1:
 * mav 07:10, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Gutza 07:52, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 11:31, Jun 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 13:53, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * Arbitrator votes against proposed principle 1:
 * Martin 22:31, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC) "Admins are instructed to use good judgement while enforcing this policy" - current policy is that admins are not empowered to enforce this policy. The arbitration committee is not empowered to change policy, only judge it. I'm also a litle unconvinced that remove personal attacks (which I personally support) has sufficient support as a generic thing, rather than a specific remedy in bad cases.


 * Arbitrator abstains regarding proposed principle 1:
 * Camembert 13:04, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC) I agree with Martin. I think we should at least clarify what is meant by "admins are instructed to use good judgement while enforcing this policy"? It sounds a bit like a license to ban, and I'm not sure I'm completely comfortable with that.

Proposed temporary orders
1) {text of proposed orders}


 * Arbitrator votes for proposed temporary order 1:


 * Arbitrator votes against proposed temporary order 1:


 * Arbitrator abstains regarding proposed temporary order 1:

Proposed findings of fact
proposed wording to be modified by arbitrators and then voted on

1) The findings of fact expressed at Requests for arbitration/Theresa knott vs. Mr-Natural-Health have not changed. This user still behaves inappropriately on a consistent and excessive basis, makes personal attacks in violation of Wikipedia's policy, and uses edit summaries in an effort to intimidate other editors.


 * Arbitrator votes for proposed finding of fact 1:
 * mav 07:10, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Gutza 07:52, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 11:31, Jun 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 13:53, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * the Epopt 16:54, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Delirium 01:14, Jun 26, 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 22:31, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * Arbitrator votes against proposed finding of fact 1:


 * Arbitrator abstains regarding proposed finding of fact 1:
 * Camembert 13:04, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC) I'm really not happy voting for these things unless there are links to specific diffs given to back us up. It's not just for my benefit, it's for everybody's. If somebody else wants to add some, great. If not, I might have a go myself later

2) That Mr Natural Health has willfully propositioned Irismeister about using him (MrNH) as a proxy editor for Irismeister in contradiction of Irismeister's ban on editing an article.


 * Arbitrator votes for proposed finding of fact 2
 * mav 07:10, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Gutza 07:52, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 11:31, Jun 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 13:53, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * the Epopt 16:54, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Delirium 01:14, Jun 26, 2004 (UTC)


 * Arbitrator votes against proposed finding of fact 2


 * Arbitrator abstains regarding proposed finding of fact 2
 * Martin 22:31, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC) True-ish, but not relevant. Nothing wrong with this kind of offer if done in a non zombie slave manner.
 * Camembert 13:04, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC) - this may be true, but I'm not sure it's relevant, as I don't think it was entirely clear that people weren't allowed to do this in the way it was done (see below).

Proposed remedies
proposed wording to be modified by arbitrators and then voted on

1) Since it is evident that the previous 30 day ban of Mr Natural Health did not attain the intended result, we rule that this user shall be banned from editing for a period of three months.


 * Arbitrator votes for proposed remedy 1:
 * mav 07:10, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Gutza 07:52, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 11:31, Jun 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 14:00, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * the Epopt 16:54, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Delirium 01:13, Jun 26, 2004 (UTC) (althogh I'd favor something longer as well)
 * Martin 22:31, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC) (this does read like - "we tried something, but it didn't work, so we're trying it again! However, in combination with a parole (see below), I can live with it).


 * Arbitrator votes against proposed remedy 1:


 * Arbitrator abstains regarding proposed remedy 1:
 * Camembert 13:04, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC) if we get some links to diffs to back up finding 1) above, I'll probably vote in favour of this

2) For attempting to circumvent Irismeister's ban on editing Iridology, we rule that Mr Natural Health is hereby forbidden from editing that article or its talk page indefinitely and also add a week total ban from editing any page.


 * Arbitrator votes for proposed remedy 2:
 * mav 07:10, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Gutza 07:52, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 11:31, Jun 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 14:00, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC) (Though perhaps a little harsh.)
 * the Epopt 16:54, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Delirium 01:13, Jun 26, 2004 (UTC)


 * Arbitrator votes against proposed remedy 2:
 * Martin 22:31, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC) This wasn't an attempt to "circumvent Irismeister's ban".
 * Camembert 13:04, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC) if we want MNH to stop acting as Irismeister's proxy, then lets say that (or maybe clarify the previous ruling so it says something like "Irismeister is forbidden to have any input, either personally or through a proxy, to the iridology article or talk page"). But we did not ban Irismeister from discussing the iridology article or editing the talk page (maybe (maybe) we should have, but we didn't), we just banned him from editing the article. Given that, is it really right to punish MNH for doing something which wasn't clearly disallowed in the first place?


 * Arbitrator abstains regarding proposed remedy 2:

3) Mr Natural Health is again instructed to abstain from personal attacks and other breaches of Wikipedia etiquette, and placed on personal attack parole. Sysops are authorised to apply 24 temp-bans on Mr Natural Health, at their discretion, if Mr Natural Health breaches this instruction. Users are encouraged to remove personal attacks.


 * Arbitrator votes for proposed remedy 3:
 * Martin 22:41, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 01:29, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Camembert 13:04, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 02:11, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC) (Must have missed this one, oops.)


 * Arbitrator votes against proposed remedy 3:


 * Arbitrator abstains regarding proposed remedy 3:

Enforcement
proposed wording to be modified by arbitrators and then voted on

1) {text of proposed enforcement}


 * Arbitrator votes for proposed enforcement 1:


 * Arbitrator votes against proposed enforcement 1:


 * Arbitrator abstains regarding proposed enforcement 1:

Motion to close
As only two other people appear to support my eminently sensible personal attack parole in this case, (sulk!), I move to close this case. Martin 00:51, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Three, now; perhaps give it another few days (I hadn't looked at the page in over a month, as it hadn't been edited)...?
 * James F. (talk) 02:15, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Close. --mav 05:53, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)