Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

m

Line 578:

MF can be removed from the list of involved users—a fixed-length block of seven days has been imposed, the long length of which seems entirely correct given the repeated violations, and MF has accepted the block.  Arbcom's role here is to bring the admins back into alignment with the community's WP:CIVIL standard.  Arbcom needs to empower the admins to respond to open uncivil aggression, as well as bad language.  [[User:Unscintillating|Unscintillating]] ([[User talk:Unscintillating|talk]]) 04:44, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

=== Statement by Hawkeye7 ===

The facts of this case has been stated by others. I appreciate the understanding that all the admins involved acted in good faith and did what they believed to be correct and proper.

I did not impose a block as a form of punishment or "cooling off". The consensus was that a block should be imposed, but that an indefinite block was too severe. A week was chosen as a period sufficient for the purpose of preventing further disruption to the RfA process.

I do not accept that Malleus is my "superior", nor that his work is worth more than mine.

I do accept that the use of hateful and misogynist language is acceptable where Malleus comes from (but do not really believe it). He did not seem playful and misunderstanding, but angry and aggressive.

I do not understand why an RfC is not in order. I thought that ArbCom preferred conciliation to arbitration.

====Reply to Chzz====

I greatly regret a misunderstanding here. "Stewed" has another meaning here, of someone who is troubled ("near boiling") and prone to outbursts ("boiling over"). I deeply regret any misunderstanding or offence caused.

=== Clerk notes ===