390:. If you can follow the conditions of a temporary unblock, then you might be unblocked. You haven't been banned yet by the community and attempting to resolve disputes through the proper channels might be a step in the right direction, although I found part of what you said concerning. Remember, significantly breaching those conditions can lead to a ban. But if you follow those conditions and conduct yourself appropriately, then the unblock may become permanent.
422:
63:
303:
The
Arbitration Committee is a panel of experienced users that exists to impose binding solutions to Knowledge disputes that neither communal discussion, administrators, nor mediation have been able to resolve, and to consider certain cases where exceptional factors such as privacy preclude a public
309:
Arbitration is the last step in the dispute resolution process–it is a last resort, only to be employed when all else has failed. Try other steps first, including discussion between disputants and, where appropriate, mediation. The
Arbitration Committee only deals with the most serious disputes and
385:
Content disputes are rejected regularly by ArbCom, and I have no doubt this would be one of them if presented - particularly when conduct issues can be handled by the community or individual admins. As for your request, Anthony is a mediator so you may wish to contact him - or another mediator at
362:
overall. There's been a POV tag up there since
February 08 so we might as well get the show on the road. As an indef-blocked user could I still speak at the hearing? I would give you my word that I would not edit any article or participate in any talk page. It would be strictly to present the
337:
The principle that ArbCom avoids content issues and deals with user conduct is unwritten (so far as I know), but still carries quite a bit of weight. With a few notable exceptions, the
Committee takes pains to avoid making content-based rulings - in fact, you'll see quite a few proposed findings
357:
and the poor souls that have to deal with the fall-out to get the content and rule breaking issues resolved ASAP. Is there a way to proceed forward; I'm willing to put my wiki-career on the line for this which would make a lot of people happy. I believe the arguments have crystalized (on both
109:
CorticoSpinal, your behaviour after I extended a conditional unblock to you has reached the levels of disruption: your continuing ability to edit is evidently not a net positive for the project. To outline briefly:
229:"A usual block prevents users from editing all pages except their user talk page. Users are allowed to retain editing access to their user talk page, in order to have a chance for appeal,
166:
at a later date, on the condition that you can demonstrate both a reform in editing habits and attitudes (that is, that you won't repeat the behaviour detailed above, and on the relevant
358:
sides) and I've come up with 3-5 fundamental questions that ArbCom or mediation can address which will go a long, long, long way until resolving the drama that surrounds myself and
94:
435:
439:
250:
In any case, note that ArbCom do not handle content disputes. Only
Article RFC and mediation do, and the latter requires the willingness of all those involved.
190:
I have archived this talk page, as it should really only be used for appealing the block. That's been done, so it's time to adhere to the block, please.
86:
207:
Sorry, I did not realize that I was not adhering to the block restriction by replying to comments left on my talk page by other editors. I apologize.
338:
rejected with the rationale that they are "content matters". In practice, the line between user conduct and content is a bit blurry, of course.
233:
so that they are not shut out completely and are able to participate at least to some degree in
Knowledge, whilst the block is active." -
82:
40:
36:
32:
28:
138:
152:
I'm not currently convinced that allowing you to edit is beneficial to the project at all. To that end, I've placed an
70:
237:. But Anthony is probably doing you more good at the moment by archiving that discussion that was continuing.
431:
410:
395:
255:
387:
327:
364:
277:
208:
443:
391:
298:
276:
It was my understanding that ArbCom handles behavioural/editing problems, is this correct?
251:
234:
160:
128:
323:
340:
167:
359:
354:
119:
You're Jewish, eh
Jonathan? I'm sure you understand what's its like to be judged...
17:
114:
References to editor's ethnicity with a view to heating the discussion up (viz.,
421:
173:), but at the moment, blocking your accounts seems the only option left open.
457:
399:
372:
344:
331:
285:
259:
216:
198:
183:
52:
62:
191:
176:
45:
314:
Note, this doesn't say anything about content or behaviour as such, but
438:
for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with
353:
Certainly it is in the best interest of everyone editing at
170:
145:
135:
125:
115:
90:
78:
156:
block on your account. Whilst I am not opposed to an
436:Knowledge:Suspected sock puppets/CorticoSpinal
134:interjecting inappropriate allegations (viz.,
8:
57:
168:administrators' noticeboard for incidents
139:focussing on content, not the contributor
7:
442:before editing the evidence page.
25:
420:
61:
1:
458:23:07, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
416:
44:; Previous threads archived.
473:
144:Edit warring: you've been
430:You have been accused of
400:17:43, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
373:21:59, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
368:
345:21:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
332:20:27, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
286:19:14, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
281:
260:17:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
217:19:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
212:
199:16:41, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
184:18:27, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
53:16:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
310:cases of rule-breaking.
127:), rather than keeping
73:from editing Knowledge.
124:"fanning the flames" (
69:This account has been
440:notes for the suspect
148:for that in the past.
87:deleted contributions
71:blocked indefinitely
434:. Please refer to
95:current autoblocks
27:Prior discussion:
18:User:CorticoSpinal
456:
428:
427:
363:case. Thoughts?
102:
101:
98:
55:
16:(Redirected from
464:
455:
453:
448:
424:
417:
196:
181:
165:
159:
76:
65:
58:
50:
43:
21:
472:
471:
467:
466:
465:
463:
462:
461:
449:
444:
415:
192:
177:
163:
157:
137:), rather than
107:
46:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
470:
468:
426:
425:
414:
408:
407:
406:
405:
404:
403:
402:
378:
377:
376:
375:
348:
347:
295:
294:
293:
292:
291:
290:
289:
288:
267:
266:
265:
264:
263:
262:
243:
242:
241:
240:
239:
238:
222:
221:
220:
219:
202:
201:
187:
150:
149:
142:
132:
122:
106:
103:
100:
99:
75:
66:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
469:
460:
459:
454:
452:
447:
441:
437:
433:
423:
419:
418:
412:
409:
401:
397:
393:
389:
384:
383:
382:
381:
380:
379:
374:
370:
366:
365:CorticoSpinal
361:
356:
352:
351:
350:
349:
346:
343:
342:
336:
335:
334:
333:
329:
325:
321:
320:rule-breaking
317:
312:
311:
306:
305:
300:
287:
283:
279:
278:CorticoSpinal
275:
274:
273:
272:
271:
270:
269:
268:
261:
257:
253:
249:
248:
247:
246:
245:
244:
236:
232:
228:
227:
226:
225:
224:
223:
218:
214:
210:
209:CorticoSpinal
206:
205:
204:
203:
200:
197:
195:
189:
188:
186:
185:
182:
180:
174:
172:
169:
162:
155:
147:
143:
140:
136:
133:
131:to a minimum;
130:
126:
123:
120:
116:
113:
112:
111:
104:
96:
92:
88:
84:
83:contributions
80:
74:
72:
67:
64:
60:
59:
56:
54:
51:
49:
42:
38:
34:
30:
19:
450:
445:
432:sockpuppetry
429:
411:Sockpuppetry
388:WP:MEDIATION
360:Chiropractic
355:Chiropractic
339:
319:
315:
313:
308:
307:
302:
296:
230:
193:
178:
175:
153:
151:
118:
108:
68:
47:
26:
392:Ncmvocalist
252:Ncmvocalist
154:indefinite
91:page moves
41:/Archive 4
37:/Archive 3
33:/Archive 2
29:/Archive 1
324:Gwen Gale
299:WP:ARBCOM
235:WP:APPEAL
79:block log
341:MastCell
316:disputes
304:hearing.
194:Anthøny
179:Anthøny
161:unblock
146:blocked
105:Blocked
77:(info:
48:Anthøny
451:Marlin
446:Orange
171:thread
297:From
129:drama
413:case
396:talk
369:talk
328:talk
318:and
282:talk
256:talk
213:talk
231:and
121:");
398:)
371:)
330:)
322:.
301::
284:)
258:)
215:)
164:}}
158:{{
93:•
89:•
85:•
81:•
39:•
35:•
31:•
394:(
367:(
326:(
280:(
254:(
211:(
141:;
117:"
97:)
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
