Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2016-04-14/Arbitration report


 * It's unfortunate this went to Arbcom. The argument to send it there was that a widely supported community indef might be reversed by some random admin.  But I think Arbcom should hear real disputes, not hypothetical ones.  When there's just one person and many disinterested parties are saying what he did was wrong, that's a simple disciplinary matter, not a dispute to be arbitrated.  (I mean, there's literally one "involved party" on a case being arbitrated.  That kind of thing can physically damage your logic organs.)  Wnt (talk) 20:26, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Just to clarify: The results of the poll (which was closed 3.5 days after opening) at the recent ANI were actually: 22 supporting site ban, 6 take it to Arbcom, 5 mentoring, and 1 neutral. Since almost all of the "take it to Arbcom" voters were actually pro-siteban, that's more than a 2/3 majority, it's over 80%. Softlavender (talk) 14:50, 26 April 2016 (UTC)