Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change/General discussion: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 22:21, 20 August 2010

Latest revision as of 08:55, 15 September 2021

(25 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{RFARcasenav|case name=Climate change|clerk1=Amorymeltzer|clerk2=Dougweller|draft arb=Newyorkbrad|draft arb2=Rlevse|draft arb3=Risker|general=yes}}

'''Guidelines''': This page is to be used to ask general questions about the case for arbitrators and clerks to answer. Please post the question you have below in a new section, but individual editors should not post a new question until their current question has been answered (i.e. one question per editor at a time). All discussion of the questions should go on the talk page. Arbitrators can also use this page to pose questions to those participating in this case. Please be civil when asking, discussing and answering questions. If you wish to retrieve a question from the archive of the proposed decision talk page, please do so and link back to the previous discussion(s). I will be aiming to visit this page once every 24 hours until the case closes, but please remember to keep the discussion here general. Discussion of the proposed decision should take place on the workshop page and proposed decision talk page, not here. [[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] ([[User talk:Carcharoth|talk]]) 02:16, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Line 33 ⟶ 34:

:(b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as [[WP:AN]] or [[WP:ANI]]). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification|proper page]].<br>

Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee.}}

Could a Principle be added to the proposed decision indicating what the Arbitration Committee's position on properly established community General Sanctions is in relation to the March 2010 motion quoted above? If ArbCom considers them to be essentially the same thing as Arbitration Discretionary Sanctions, then could perhaps Request for Enforcement of General Sanctions and Arbitration Enforcement be merged into a single noticeboard? '''[[User:NuclearWarfare|<fontb colorstyle="color:navy;">[[User:NuclearWarfare|NW]]</fontb>''']] ''(<font color="green">[[User talk:NuclearWarfare|<span style="color:green;">Talk]]</fontspan>]])'' 18:51, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

::The question of the relationship between the existing General Sanctions climate change noticeboard and any future arbitration enforcement in relation to this case is being considered. For areas where such a noticeboard is established where no arbitration case has taken place, the issue is less clear. The aim for this case is to end up with a system that will enable efficient administration of enforcement requests regardless of where the sanctions originated (whether from a discussion at a GS noticeboard or from an arbitration case). [[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] ([[User talk:Carcharoth|talk]]) 22:30, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

:See below. [[User:ScottyBerg|ScottyBerg]] ([[User talk:ScottyBerg|talk]]) 21:16, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

::Here: [[Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change/General discussion#Inviolability of General Sanctions|Discuss this question]] -- [[User:JohnWBarber|JohnWBarber]] ([[User talk:JohnWBarber|talk]]) 21:35, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

==Polargeo discussion on the Proposal talk page==

Line 41 ⟶ 42:

::The committee is aware of that discussion, along with other incidents that have taken place since the workshop and evidence pages closed. Some of the incidents may be taken into account in the final decision, but not all of them will be. I suggest being patient and waiting for the proposed decision (on which more work was done yesterday and today) and then asking this question again then. [[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] ([[User talk:Carcharoth|talk]]) 22:21, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

:[[Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change/General discussion#Polargeo discussion on the Proposal talk page|Discuss this question]]

==Proposed Decisions today?==

Reading the note recently posted on the PD page, it seems to indicate that the PD will be posted today -- is that correct? <b class="nounderlines" style="border:1px solid #999;background:#fff"><span style="font-family:papyrus,serif">[[User:Minor4th|<b style="color:#000;font-size:110%">Minor</b>]][[User talk:Minor4th|<b style="color:#f00;font-size:80%">4th</b>]]</span></b> 21:39, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

:See below:Yes. [[User:ScottyBergCarcharoth|ScottyBergCarcharoth]] ([[User talk:ScottyBergCarcharoth|talk]]) 2102:1638, 2023 August 2010 (UTC)

:[[Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate_change/General_discussion#Proposed_Decisions_today.3F|Discuss this question]]

==Voting on PD/Closure Timeline==

I have some serious issues with the PD and I'd like to discuss them, but I'm concerned that there will be a rush to vote on the various measures before I have the energy/time (i.e. not today) to make my thoughts known - when will that section be closed/voted on? My concern is one of basic psychology - once a person makes up their mind they are resistant to new evidence or incorrect evidence being corrected - the emotion still remains even when the facts are wrong. [[User:Thegoodlocust|TheGoodLocust]] ([[User talk:Thegoodlocust|talk]]) 23:32, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

::I have drawn the attention of the other arbitrators to this post. You should post something similar to the proposed decision talk page if you have not already, and make a statement there in the section provided for statements, as well as discussing matters further in the discussion section as needed. I won't be starting to vote until towards the end of this week, but I can't speak for the other arbitrators. [[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] ([[User talk:Carcharoth|talk]]) 01:05, 24 August 2010 (UTC) <small>Updated: 03:23, 24 August 2010 (UTC)</small>

::The proposed decision is a complex document prepared by multiple people that will affect many editors. As I noted last night, I have no intention of voting on findings and remedies until there is an opportunity for editors to comment on the proposals, and although I did vote on the principles, those votes too are subject to modification based on input that may come in suggesting difficulties or improvements. Although for various reasons it took us longer than expected to post the proposed decision, I do not, and I don't believe any arbitrator does, believe that the way to mitigate that is by rushing to a conclusion now. [[User:Newyorkbrad|Newyorkbrad]] ([[User talk:Newyorkbrad|talk]]) 01:36, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

:[[Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change/General discussion#Voting on PD/Closure Timeline|Discuss this question]]