Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Longevity/Evidence

Deadline for evidence submissions
I would like to have all evidence submissions completed by Friday, December 3. If any of the parties will not be able to complete their presentations by that date, please let me know as soon as possible. Kirill [talk] [prof] 23:32, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed, thanks, I was pushing to have it all done by the morning of Mon the 29th, but will be happy to consider myself free to add tweaks up through 11:59 GMT on the 3rd. JJB 02:19, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Based on requests from some of the parties, we're extending the evidence period until January 15, 2011. This will hopefully be sufficient for everyone's needs. Kirill [talk] [prof] 01:27, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Um, given that, I think it would be inappropriate to stand on ceremony and lay out all my cards this week. To maintain level playing field, I must respectfully reserve the right to leave my evidence incomplete until the week of 9-15 Jan. JJB 04:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC) As per the above, my evidence on this page will be complete within 24 hours. JJB 00:00, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Repeated Accusations of Cabalism
They're starting to wear thin. It's my hope that this neutrally phrased request might cause them to abate. David in DC (talk) 18:59, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * And the attacks still haven't stopped. I'm not personally offended at being told to get a life, but it's doing nothing productive; I can't believe I've actually had to file a WQA to try to get one user to back off.  The Blade of the Northern Lights  ( 話して下さい ) 00:37, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The case will move to the decision phase within the next few days. I hope and expect that everyone involved in this topic can maintain a reasonable degree of decorum until that time. Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:39, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks; whatever anyone may say about you arbs, I know you're working hard and doing the best you can. The Blade of the Northern Lights  ( 話して下さい ) 00:48, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

No progress?
What's happened here? Has this case been forgotten? It's been open for over two month with no proposed decision. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 15:06, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Please note that a good portion of the evidence was delayed, with the final bits not being received until mid January. I believe we will have a proposed decision up soon. – xeno talk  15:20, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Would appreciate some guidance from arbs as to whether they need any more commentary from parties. I could either put in a lot of work, or just leave it because plenty has already been said. Itsmejudith (talk) 15:22, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't believe we need any more material; but if you have some comments that you think would be of value, please feel free to make them. Given the (relative) brevity of the evidence presentations, I don't anticipate we'd have any trouble following commentary at this point. Kirill [talk] [prof] 00:24, 4 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Right is better than fast. And, as befits a case about longevity, time here is relative. Schedule-related unavailability sure hasn't retained its dictionary meaning in RY's use of the term. Neither, for that matter, has "wikibreak". Also, in the WP:WALLEDGARDEN, elderly folks compete for "titles" by outliving "incumbents". If that doesn't bespeak a non-nuetral POV about the very concepts of time and longevity, I'm Christina Aguillera, compleat with burlesque g-string and pasties. David in DC (talk) 21:06, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, my workshop proposals will be complete within 27 hours. I think that whatever Itsmejudith can assemble before the arbs unhuddle would be great too. JJB 21:40, 3 February 2011 (UTC)