User talk:Gerda Arendt/ACE 2017
The Joefromrandb case[edit]
The Joefromrandb arbitration case request was declined by the Arbitration Committee and has been archived.
At the time Opabinia regalis voted decline on this, the Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter was running <7/0/1> (accept/decline/recuse)
The final vote was <3/7/2>, which certainly points to Opabinia regalis being an opinion leader on the Committee. – wbm1058 (talk) 16:18, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
- bzzt, don't help the candidates too much who - hopefully - will nominate themselves and have to answer the question ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:21, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
- In other words: I want to see what they can find out about the history. So far not one of them used the word irony ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:23, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: assuming this is no longer a live question, and everyone has answered it, can you tell us what your opinion of the "decline" vote was? Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 21:20, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
- Relief. Did you see my comment - the first after the request? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:57, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
- I did see it - you said that you have worked very well with Joe for some years, I believe, and would like to see him exonerated. I wasn't sure, though, if that meant you supported an ArbCom case because they might be able to remove the cloud surrounding him completely, or if you were worried about what it might lead to. Thanks for clarifying! — Amakuru (talk) 21:02, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- My background told me that arbcom creates more clouds than removes them, and even if they remove them, it's with a high investment of time. Better a bit cloudy ;) - As Joe doesn't archive you can read his whole history on his talk, - recommended reading. Some just see a blocklog, which I never ever looked at, for anybody, - simply not interested. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Alright, thanks for the reply! I'll have a look through the talk page history when I get a chance. — Amakuru (talk) 09:56, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- Just talk page, - I told him four years ago again that he is precious but doesn't deserve a price for archiving. Look for "Bishonen", perhaps. Or "wife". Or my name, of course ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:19, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- Alright, thanks for the reply! I'll have a look through the talk page history when I get a chance. — Amakuru (talk) 09:56, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- My background told me that arbcom creates more clouds than removes them, and even if they remove them, it's with a high investment of time. Better a bit cloudy ;) - As Joe doesn't archive you can read his whole history on his talk, - recommended reading. Some just see a blocklog, which I never ever looked at, for anybody, - simply not interested. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- I did see it - you said that you have worked very well with Joe for some years, I believe, and would like to see him exonerated. I wasn't sure, though, if that meant you supported an ArbCom case because they might be able to remove the cloud surrounding him completely, or if you were worried about what it might lead to. Thanks for clarifying! — Amakuru (talk) 21:02, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Relief. Did you see my comment - the first after the request? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:57, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: assuming this is no longer a live question, and everyone has answered it, can you tell us what your opinion of the "decline" vote was? Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 21:20, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Gerda, hey, my block log is pretty short, and it's only been vandals so far. But, a question in response to your new question. What remedies would you recommend for editors who edit warred, engaged in battleground conduct, made personal attacks and engaged in incivility on a regular basis? wbm1058 (talk) 19:02, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
- You mean, people like me? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:35, 4 March 2018 (UTC)