Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Skepticism and coordinated editing/Proposed decision: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 04:17, 3 March 2022

Revision as of 08:00, 6 March 2022

Line 104:

:::I think my comment on the principle speaks to the questions to the others, so I won't attempt to answer them :^). [[User:Izno|Izno]] ([[User talk:Izno|talk]]) 00:43, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

:::Just acknowledging that I saw this, and I'm thinking about it. [[User:Enterprisey|Enterprisey]] ([[User talk:Enterprisey|talk!]]) 09:26, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

::::As I said in my follow-up, I withdrew my statement about training, but I might as well clarify. I wanted to say it seemed reasonable to not require GSoW to open up membership to anyone, but I guess I worded it poorly. For your other questions, it would certainly be nice if training were only offered by people without interests in promoting POVs, but we wouldn't be able to enforce that. All we can do is look at the resulting editing, which we do. I don't think required training is justified in any subject area (merely that I thought perhaps GSoW would be justified in having training as a prerequisite to actually joining GSoW). Finally, I find the hidden membership part orthogonal to any training concerns. [[User:Enterprisey|Enterprisey]] ([[User talk:Enterprisey|talk!]]) 08:00, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

:As the case seems about to close, I will ask one further question: