User:MBisanz/RFAR
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is a draft of a request for arbitration that has not yet been made, yet is under my consideration to make. It is not an attack page, a permanent page, a page I own, or an attempt to coerce anyone. Thank you.
Contents |
[edit] {Betacommand 2}
Initiated by MBisanz talk at 15:27, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Involved parties
- MBisanz (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights), filing party
- Betacommand (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
- Hammersoft (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
- Bellwether BC (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
- Ryan Postlethwaite (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights)
- Carcharoth (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights)
- Badagnani (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
- Barneca (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
- Maxim (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights)
- BrownHairedGirl (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights)
- Llywrch (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights)
- MickMacNee (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
- Allstarecho (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
- Avruch (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
- Enigmaman (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
- LaraLove (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights)
- WJBscribe (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights)
- Krimpet (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights)
- Random832 (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights)
- Carnildo (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights)
- Friday (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights)
- Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request
- User:MBisanz, filing party
- User:Betacommand
- User:Hammersoft
- User:Bellwether BC
- User:Ryan Postlethwaite
- User:Carcharoth
- User:Badagnani
- User:Barneca
- User:Maxim
- User:BrownHairedGirl
- User:Llywrch
- User:MickMacNee
- User:Allstarecho
- User:Avruch
- User:Enigmaman
- User:LaraLove
- User:WJBscribe
- User:Krimpet
- User:Random832
- User:Carnildo
- User:Friday
- Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried
- Warned of uncivil behavior
- Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Betacommand
- Wikipedia:Bots/BetaCommandBot and NFCC 10 c courtesy blanked
- Other avenues have not been pursued in light of Betacommand's statements welcoming an arbcom, stating an RfC would be a waste of time, note that suggestions will not be taken in forum and in light of the RfC-style nature of the WP:AN/B subpage.
I bring this request with a heavy heart. Having supported the process to make all images fairuse compliant and defended Betacommand numerous times against what I felt were unfair attacks I believed that the end of the legacy image tagging project would result in an end to the constant debate, however, I now believe I misjudged the situation. Over the last several months Betacommand has violated several behavioral guidelines. While this would normally not be enough to warrant an Arbcom, he has also violated Bot Policy on multiple occasions with his bot, BetacommandBot (talk · contribs). This is not an isolated incident, but rather a lengthy pattern of behavior in various forums. Prior attempts as dispute resolution have been unsuccessful in part due to his refusal to actively engage in meaningful conversation and in part due to the ad-hoc nature of the pre-Arbcom DR steps. Specifically, I take issue with:
- The irresponsible spamming of MickMacNee's talk page. WP:DR is not an optional process to be followed when we feel like it.
- Disregarding the explicit wording of Bot Policy in using a bot on People Categories.
- Running up the edit count of the mainpage without prior approval
- Continuing to refuse to communicate with regard to good faith inquiries and community consensus
- Responding to matters in an uncivil manner despite being aware of the policies and having been warned multiple times. What some might call a fait accompli.
For the record, I state the following policies and guidelines I feel Betacommand has violated, with supporting diffs.
Policies
- WP:BOT specifically Wikipedia:BOT#Restrictions_on_specific_tasks-Editing categories on people [1], [2], [3] as example of total at [4], Wikipedia:BOT#Requirements-There appears no consensus on how phase 4 should be implemented (it is not covered in the original BRFA nor as defined at Archive91 with notification templates), Wikipedia:BOT#Dealing_with_issues-Insisting on prior warning before bot blocks [5], [6], [7], [8], [9]
- WP:NPA accusing an admin of forcing BLP and V violations to occur, wiki-lawyering justification for attack comments, extreme personal attack, further attack on same user,
- WP:CIVIL claiming right to say things how he wants to, attack on discussion page of behavior, attack on Carnildo, saying a proposal will rot in hell, uncivl towards admin over block, reverting thread of valid complaint,
- WP:CONS threatening to react unless others are sanctioned, removing proposal to address issue, disclosure of attempt to stop discussion through off-wiki activities
Guidelines
- WP:POINT justifying point disrupting as other users get away with it
- WP:WQT declaring a valid warning vandalism, accusing established and involvd editor of trolling, referring to discussion page as lies and bullshit, calling an admin untrustworthy, still being uncivil when saying he's not, telling another user to shut up, insisting on a BITEing intro header,
- WP:HAR threatening a user who criticized BCB, 50 edit spam by BCB of user who criticized him, wikilawyering obvious wikistalking, not sure if this is a joke or threat,
- WP:DISRUPT admitting he spammed a userpage, defending uncivil behavior due to others not being penalized, stating he interprets when AGF applies to other's comments,
- WP:ROLLBACK justifying abuse of rollback, using rollback in content dispute.
[edit] Statement by {Party 2}
[edit] Clerk notes
- This area is used for notes by non-recused Clerks.