Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2005-06-27/Arbitration report


 * Instantnood's advocate, Wally, objected that Instantnood was being subjected to personal attacks and should not be penalized for the Arbitration Committee's procedural error.

I would liek to point out that while Wally objects the case being reopened, it was someone else who first posted about Instantnood being personally attacked.


 * Tell me what's this: &#21780;&#23628;&#21040;&#20320;&#21780;&#22909;&#20197;&#28858;&#33258;&#24049;&#22909;&#25754;&#22411;&#65292;&#23628;&#37027;&#26143;! &#21547;&#23478;&#21604; (Don't think you're damn smart if I don't fuck you. Fuck that star. Go to hell your entire family) I found this threatening statment in Instatnood's talk page.


 * Obviously, someone has made serious insult plus personal attack before the arbitration. In fact, SchmuckyTheCat used to write indecently weird phrases like &#29494;&#22826;&#38512;&#33686;&#35987; (Jewish Penis Cat) in his (I use "his" because he's got a penis as he claims) user page, and for many times I see he creates some users' pages by adding a full stop. I don't think that's a patent accident at all. Does it violate some rules of wikipedia? I'm new to here, and I know little about Wikipedia's policy. But I would feel terribly annoyed if someone attempted to "deflower" my user page -- that's just like rape, to be honest. -- Jerry Crimson Mann 18:30, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Posted three hours before Wally's response. Also notice my response on that page.SYSS Mouse 28 June 2005 20:21 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the information. Given how Wikipedia arbitration works, the article must obviously summarize the proceedings and cannot be a blow-by-blow account of all the evidence presented. Since Wally actually represents Instantnood, I determined that it would be easier to convey Instantnood's position by mentioning his objections, rather than bringing in points made by other people who are not necessarily parties to the case. --Michael Snow 28 June 2005 20:37 (UTC)