Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Christianity and Sexuality/Workshop

Parties to the case
Per Committee consensus I've removed as a party to this case, because:
 * minimal involvement in any of the matters under consideration;
 * no significant evidence submitted by them, or about them, in the case request or Evidence section; and
 * on what has been submitted, there is no reason to believe they will feature in the remainder of proceedings.

The purpose of removing a party from the case is simply to give that person peace of mind that they are not considered "involved."

This comes with two disclaimers. First, removal doesn't prevent anyone from mentioning CBW or referring to anything they did or didn't do. Second, removing this one party but not any other does not mean that all the remaining parties will feature any further, or have findings relevant to them. generally, it means that the remaining parties are either central players in the case, have submitted useful evidence, or have featured in some significant way in the dispute.

Happy to discuss if required. -- Euryalus (talk) 02:16, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Query: more general remedies
What are the opinions of arbitrators re: establishing more general remedies like those set up in other cases? Is this something that's considered necessary only in cases where there's been previous community sanctions and/or disruption by a large number of users? (Disruptive editing to articles in this topic area is not uncommon, but most of the culprits give up pretty quickly.) I have no opinion on whether or not they're necessary, this isn't meant to be a leading question. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 18:59, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Such as? Dougweller (talk) 19:09, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Discretionary sanctions, edit notices, ...? –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 19:30, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Open to argument but am not presently seeing justification for DS. --Euryalus (talk) 11:56, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Extension date
I'm extending the dates 3 days - there's new material and editors and Arbs need a chance to comment. Dougweller (talk) 16:31, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Change to drafting arbitrators
Just noting here for the information of all participants in this case that User:Euryalus has had to go inactive and have been removing as a drafting arbitrator from this case, per their request. Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:43, 16 February 2015 (UTC).

Workshop closing soon - anything you need from me?
Hi arbitrators - as the workshop is soon to close, I just wanted to check if there were any more answers, clarifications, edits, or proposals that you needed from me. I'll do my best to be on for the remainder if you need to reach me. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 01:42, 19 February 2015 (UTC)