Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Noloop

Statement by Ched
I added some links to other discussions that I thought would be relevant in the "Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried" section. I don't know why the community has not been more proactive in resolving these issues myself, but I suspect that there is a reluctance by some to attempt to enforce various policies and guidelines due to the perception that it would be met with some condemnation from some established editors who view the WP:CIV policy as unenforceable. Personally I see a bit of pot/kettle in play with much of this, and I view neither parties as squeaky clean in the matter. Thank you for your time. — Ched : ?  05:18, 18 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Response to User:Slatersteven addendum:
 * I should clarify that my comment "I view neither parties as squeaky clean" was primary directed toward the edits of Noloop and WebHamster. I have never noticed any improprieties in any of Slatersteven's edits.  Also, while the abrupt change in views in Abce2's comments is not something I fully understand, I am not aware of anything worthy of sanctions.  I do note that there does seem to be a concerted effort by Abce2 to bring User:Noloop's edits to light, apparently in search of some community declaration. — Ched :  ?  14:51, 18 August 2009 (UTC)