After considering /Evidence and discussing proposals with other Arbitrators, parties and others at /Workshop, Arbitrators may place proposals which are ready for voting here. Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or abstain. Only items that receive a majority "support" vote will be passed. Conditional votes for or against and abstentions should be explained by the Arbitrator before or after his/her time-stamped signature. For example, an Arbitrator can state that she/he would only favor a particular remedy based on whether or not another remedy/remedies were passed. Only Arbitrators or Clerks should edit this page; non-Arbitrators may comment on the talk page.

For this case, there are 11 active Arbitrators, so 6 votes are a majority.

If observing editors notice any discrepancies between the arbitrators' tallies and the final decision or the

Clerks' noticeboard

. Similarly, arbitrators may request clerk assistance via the same method.

Proposed motions

Arbitrators may place proposed motions affecting the case in this section for voting. Typical motions might be to close or dismiss a case without a full decision (a reason should normally be given), or to add an additional party (although this can also be done without a formal motion as long as the new party is on notice of the case). Suggestions by the parties or other non-arbitrators for motions or other requests should be placed on the /Workshop page for consideration and discussion.
Motions have the same majority for passage as the final decision.

Template

1) {text of proposed motion}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed temporary injunctions

A temporary injunction is a directive from the Arbitration Committee that parties to the case, or other editors notified of the injunction, do or refrain from doing something while the case is pending.

Four net "support" votes needed to pass (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first vote is normally the fastest an injunction will be imposed.

Continuation of temporary restrictions

1) The parties are directed to continue to comply with the existing editing restrictions detailed here until this case is resolved or until further direction of the Arbitration Committee. In the event of any disagreement concerning the scope of the restrictions, the parties should err on the side of caution and avoid any arguable violations. The parties are urged to present their evidence in this case as soon as possible and to indicate when they have finished, so that the committee can reach a prompt final decision which will supersede this temporary injunction. Nothing in this temporary injunction constitutes a ruling on the merits of the case or reflects any prejudgment that all, some, or none of the temporary restrictions will be included in the final decision.

Support:

Proposed. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:17, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support current sanctions to continue until the Committee makes a ruling. Like Newyorkbrad, I urge the parties (and other users) to add evidence to show the needs for making these sanctions permanent, lifting sanctions, or other alternatives. FloNight ♥♥♥ 21:24, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill ^(prof) 01:06, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 15:53, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Injunction enacted. Clerk to post and notify. Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:36, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed final decision

Proposed principles

Conduct of Wikipedia editors

1) Wikipedia users are expected to behave reasonably, calmly, and courteously in their interactions with other users; to approach even difficult situations in a dignified fashion and with a constructive and collaborative outlook; and to avoid acting in a manner that brings the project into disrepute. Unseemly and disruptive conduct, such as personal attacks, incivility, assumptions of bad faith, harassment, the perpetuation of petty feuds and grievances, disruptive point-making, and gaming the system, is prohibited.

Support:

Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:23, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FloNight ♥♥♥ 23:26, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill ^(prof) 01:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sam Blacketer (talk) 16:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 06:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:39, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Harassment

2) It is unacceptable for any editor to harass another. See the anti-harassment policy, Wikipedia:Harassment. Acts of harassment damage the editing environment and may deter contributors from continuing to edit Wikipedia.

Support:

Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:23, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FloNight ♥♥♥ 23:26, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill ^(prof) 01:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sam Blacketer (talk) 16:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 06:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:39, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

"Wikistalking"

3) As discussed in the harassment policy, "the term 'wiki-stalking' has been coined to describe following a contributor around Wikipedia, editing the same articles as the target, with the intent of causing annoyance or distress to the other editor. Reading another user's contribution log is not in itself harassment as the logs are publicly accessible for good reason. In particular, proper use of an editor's history includes (but is not limited to) fixing errors or violations of Wikipedia policy or correcting related problems on multiple articles.... [However,] if 'following another user around' is accompanied by

disruptive behavior

, it may become a very serious matter and could result in blocks and other editing restrictions."

Support:

Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:23, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FloNight ♥♥♥ 23:26, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill ^(prof) 01:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sam Blacketer (talk) 16:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 06:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:39, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Feuds and quarrels

4) Editors who consistently find themselves in disputes with each other whenever they interact on Wikipedia, and who are unable to resolve their differences, should seek to minimize the extent of any unnecessary interactions between them. In extreme cases, they may be directed to do so.

Support:

Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:23, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FloNight ♥♥♥ 23:26, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill ^(prof) 01:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sam Blacketer (talk) 16:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 06:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:39, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

5) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed findings of fact

Locus of dispute

1) This case concerns a series of disputes between

Abtract (talk · contribs) and Collectonian (talk · contribs), in which Collectonian has accused Abtract of harassment and wikistalking. (Concerns have also been raised raised regarding Abtract's conduct toward Sesshomaru (talk · contribs

), but it appears that the issues involving that editor have lessened.) Several administrators have attempted to address the tension between these editors, first by proposing voluntary limitations on their interactions with each other and, when that proved insufficient, imposing mandatory restrictions that have also failed to put an end to the dispute. Because these dispute-resolution efforts failed to resolve the issues, the committee accepted this case for arbitration.

Support:

Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:53, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FloNight ♥♥♥ 23:32, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill ^(prof) 01:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sam Blacketer (talk) 16:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 06:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:39, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Abtract and Collectonian

2) Abtract and Collectonian appear to have first quarrelled in a series of petty disputes in April and May 2008. See for example this discussion and diffs found at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Abtract.

Support:

Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:53, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FloNight ♥♥♥ 23:32, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill ^(prof) 01:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sam Blacketer (talk) 16:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 06:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:39, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Harassment by Abtract

3) Over a period of several months since their initial disagreements, Abtract has harassed Collectonian on-wiki by persistently following and reverting or modifying Collectonian's edits. Based on the record as a whole, including admissions by Abtract, we conclude that Abtract acted with the intent to annoy Collectonian rather than based upon good-faith concern about her edits. See generally Collectonian's evidence, which is unrebutted, and which we have reviewed and find to be credible.

Support:

Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:53, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FloNight ♥♥♥ 23:32, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill ^(prof) 01:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sam Blacketer (talk) 16:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 06:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:39, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Abtract's evasion of restrictions

4) In view of the ongoing disputes between Abtract and Collectonian, restrictions were placed on their interaction, such as that they could not both edit the same article. Instead of using the restrictions as an opportunity for a fresh start at editing away from the user with whom he was quarrelling, Abtract has gamed the system and continued his harassment of Collectonian. For example, Abtract deliberately makes minor edits to articles that he knows are within Collectonian's areas of editing interest (but are not within Abtract's known areas of interest), thereby precluding Collectonian from editing them.

Support:

Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:53, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FloNight ♥♥♥ 23:32, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill ^(prof) 01:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sam Blacketer (talk) 16:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 06:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:39, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Abtract's block log

5) Abtract has been blocked several times for personal attacks, harassment, and violation of the editing restrictions, primarily arising from his quarrel with Collectonian.

Support:

Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:53, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FloNight ♥♥♥ 23:32, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill ^(prof) 01:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sam Blacketer (talk) 16:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 06:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:39, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Abtract's non-participation in this case

6) Abtract has stated that he will not present evidence in this case because of his disagreement with an arbitration clerk's reducing the length of his opening statement, even though an arbitrator personally assured him that his statement would be read in full and specifically invited him to present evidence.

Support:

Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:53, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FloNight ♥♥♥ 23:32, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill ^(prof) 01:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sam Blacketer (talk) 16:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 06:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:39, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

7) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed remedies

Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.

Abtract restricted

1) Abtract shall not:

(A) Interact with, or comment in any way (directly or indirectly) about, Collectonian, on any page in Wikipedia;

(B) Harass or wikistalk Collectonian such as by editing pages that Collectonian has recently edited; or

(C) Make uncivil comments about or personal attacks upon any user.

Support:

Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:02, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FloNight ♥♥♥ 23:34, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill ^(prof) 01:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In the circumstances this is a mild sanction. Sam Blacketer (talk) 16:51, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 06:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:39, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Interpretation of restrictions

2) The restrictions imposed upon Abtract shall be interpreted in a reasonable fashion so as to allow Abtract to continue with appropriate editing while preventing any further harassment of Collectonian. Any attempts to "game the system" or "wikilawyer" the details of the restrictions are unwelcome.

Support:

Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:02, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FloNight ♥♥♥ 23:34, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill ^(prof) 01:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sam Blacketer (talk) 16:51, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 06:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:39, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Collectonian urged

3) Collectonian is urged to continue to avoid any unnecessary interaction with Abtract.

Support:

Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:02, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FloNight ♥♥♥ 23:34, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill ^(prof) 01:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sam Blacketer (talk) 16:51, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 06:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:39, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

4) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed enforcement

Enforcement by block

1) Should Abtract violate the restrictions imposed upon him in this decision, he may be blocked for an appropriate period of time by any uninvolved administrator, with any blocks to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Abtract-Collectonian#Log of blocks and bans.

Support:

Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FloNight ♥♥♥ 23:34, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kirill ^(prof) 01:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sam Blacketer (talk) 16:52, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 06:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:39, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

2) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Discussion by Arbitrators

General

Motion to close

Implementation notes

Clerks and Arbitrators should use this section to clarify their understanding of the final decision--at a minimum, a list of items that have passed. Additionally, a list of which remedies are conditional on others (for instance a ban that should only be implemented if a mentorship should fail), and so on. Arbitrators should not pass the motion until they are satisfied with the implementation notes.

All proposals pass. Newyorkbrad (talk) 17:28, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Four votes to close noted. I'll likely close this around 13:00 UTC. Daniel (talk) 01:20, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vote

Four net "support" votes needed to close case (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")

24 hours from the first motion is normally the fastest a case will close.

The Clerks will close the case either immediately, or 24 hours after the fourth net support vote has been cast,
depending on whether the arbitrators have voted unanimously on the entirety of the case's proposed decision or not.

Move to close. All proposals adopted. Newyorkbrad (talk) 17:28, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Close. FloNight ♥♥♥ 17:47, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Close. Sam Blacketer (talk) 22:02, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Close. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 23:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]