Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics/Proposed decision

Main case page (Talk) — Evidence (Talk) — Workshop (Talk) — Proposed decision (Talk)

Case clerks: Ks0stm (Talk) & Callanecc (Talk) Drafting arbitrator: AGK (Talk)

After considering /Evidence and discussing proposals with other arbitrators, parties, and editors at /Workshop, arbitrators may make proposals which are ready for voting. Arbitrators will vote for or against each provision, or they may abstain. Only items which are supported by an absolute majority of the active, non-recused arbitrators will pass into the final decision. Conditional votes and abstentions will be denoted as such by the arbitrator, before or after their time-stamped signature. For example, an arbitrator can state that their support vote for one provision only applies if another provision fails to pass (these are denoted as "first" and "second choice" votes). Only arbitrators and clerks may edit this page, but non-arbitrators may comment on the talk page.

For this case there are 9 active arbitrators, not counting 2 recused. 5 support or oppose votes are a majority.

Majority reference

Abstentions	Support votes needed for majority
0–1	5
2–3	4
4–5	3

If observing editors notice any discrepancies between the arbitrators' tallies and the final decision or the #Implementation notes, you should post to the clerk talk page. Similarly, arbitrators may request clerk assistance via the same method, or via the clerks' mailing list.

Under no circumstances may this page be edited, except by members of the Arbitration Committee or the case Clerks. Please submit comment on the proposed decision to the talk page.

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.

Motion for suspension and closure of case

1) In his evidence submission to this case, Apostle12 (talk · contribs · count · logs · page moves · block log) stated he is immediately retiring from editing Wikipedia:

This will be my last submission. I have decided to place a "Retired" notice on my user page and scramble my password, thus tendering my resignation

Apostle12's conduct was a substantial part of the present arbitration case (Race and politics) and hearing this case in Apostle12's absence would serve no purpose. The committee therefore resolves that:

1. The present arbitration case is suspended for two months (from the date this motion passes).
2. If Apostle12 returns while this case is suspended, arbitration proceedings will resume.
3. If Apostle12 does not return to editing before two months have elapsed: he will be indefinitely prohibited from editing any page relating to "race and politics", broadly construed; and this case will be un-suspended and closed.
4. Apostle12 is directed to inform the Arbitration Committee if he returns to editing the English Wikipedia using any account.

Apostle12 (and all of his accounts, if he has created one or more others at that time) may be indefinitely blocked by any uninvolved administrator if he violates the prohibitions in points 3 or 4 of this motion.

Support

1. Proposed. I would also extend my thanks to Apostle12 for stating outright that he is retiring. Should he indeed not wish to return at some point soon, then his advance warning will have allowed us to expend the least possible amount of community time on these proceedings, and to close these proceedings with a definitive result. Should he change his mind, then this motion will also allow us to pick up where we left off. AGK [•] 21:32, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
2. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 14:10, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
3. Viable solution. Courcelles 16:10, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
4. T. Canens (talk) 16:35, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
5. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 22:00, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
6. Worm^TT(talk) 13:29, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
7.  Roger Davies ^talk 20:05, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Abstain

1. Am abstaining on this, as the reason I accepted the case was so that the committee could look at the conduct of all the editors involved in these disputes. That clearly isn't going to happen now, but one editor retiring doesn't necessarily resolve a dispute. If this topic area remains contentious, further dispute resolution may be needed, though possibly not at the level of arbitration. Carcharoth (talk) 23:58, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Recuse

1. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:07, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments

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.

Template

1) {text of proposed orders}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Proposed final decision

Proposed principles

Template

1) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

2) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

3) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

4) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

5) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

6) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

7) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

8) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

9) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

10) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Proposed findings of fact

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

2) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

3) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

4) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

5) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

6) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

7) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

8) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

9) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

10) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

11) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

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.

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

2) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

3) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

4) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

5) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

6) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

7) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

8) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

9) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

10) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

11) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

12) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

13) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Proposed enforcement

Standard enforcement

0) Should any user subject to a restriction in this case violate that restriction, that user may be blocked, initially for up to one month, and then with blocks increasing in duration to a maximum of one year. Appeals of blocks may be made to the imposing administrator, and thereafter to arbitration enforcement, or to the Arbitration Committee. All blocks shall be logged in the appropriate section of the main case page. (Default provision: adopted by motion on 4 June 2012.)

Comments:

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

2) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

3) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

Template

4) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Comments:

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.

Proposals which pass

{Passing principles}

{Passing findings}

{Passing remedies}

{Passing enforcement provisions}

Proposals which do not pass

{Failing principles}

{Failing findings}

{Failing remedies}

{Failing enforcement provisions}

Vote

Important: Please ask the case clerk to author the implementation notes before initiating a motion to close, so that the final decision is clear.

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.

Support

Oppose

Comments