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

Revision as of 21:42, 22 August 2010

Latest revision as of 08:55, 15 September 2021

(16 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}}

Line 35 ⟶ 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)

:[[Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change/General discussion#Inviolability of General Sanctions|Discuss this question]]

Line 45 ⟶ 44:

==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)

::Yes. [[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] ([[User talk:Carcharoth|talk]]) 02:38, 23 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_changeClimate change/General_discussionGeneral discussion#Proposed_Decisions_today.3FVoting on PD/Closure Timeline|Discuss this question]]