UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Lh778 vs Finis Valorum

Administration Services — Protection. This page has been protected against editing. See the archive of recent actions or the Protections log.

Lh778 vs Finis Valorum

I would just like to receive a reply from him. That is all. I will take any arbitrator except for The Grinch. Pages affected: This one. --_LH779 14:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I could take this case...Although it might take some time to get a reply from me...But either way...I'll find a way to handle this... --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 15:12, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I will also stick my hand up as Arbitrator.--'BP^Tmz 17:18, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Er...Finis says he won't have any part in this...Can we get a representative for him? Anyone want the job? --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 15:18, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I can, if need be, play the Devil's Advocate as I am currently online... --Ryiis 15:28, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Well now...Let's see if anyone else wants to arbitrate...As I've said...Replies from me might take a while...And when I say a while, I mean a few days... --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 15:31, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Just a note, participation is voluntary. if Finis Valorum doesn't chose to do so this case can't progress. A representative isn't an option. If Finis Valorum doesn't change his mind this case will be closed as unresolved and archived in a few days.-- Vista  +1  15:58, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Um...as a note...In the case below...Treviabot did not wish to participate and therefore Boxy represented him... --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 16:00, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

"In assisting in Arbitration, we generally suggest that both parties agree to the Arbitration. This is not, by any means, a requirement, but we do require that both parties be represented in proceedings.". All that is needed is someone to represent Finis, it does not require Finis himself to be here - and he has already declined to participate. --Ryiis 16:05, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

They're right, even though it sucks completely, that was stuck into arbitration policy at some point. But still, this isn't an arbitration case if it is what I think it is, it's vandalism and should have been dealt with there.--Karek^maps?! 16:07, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

It was on A/VB before it was here. Take a look yourself. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 16:09, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

That's still an open case, not to mention that while edit wars are the realm of A/A when those edit wars are started and maintained in bad faith it is vandalism. This is a perfect example of that and should warrant a warning at least, there's absolutely nothing A/A can do without abusing arbitration to say that Finis can't remove something from his user_talk, that's just dumb.--Karek^maps?! 16:19, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Karek is right. And I'd really like to know how This is not, by any means, a requirement, but we do require that both parties be represented in proceedings. has been inserting into this. I don't think it's legitimate change. An abritrator has almost unlimited power to make up any ruling it wants. the fact that both people agree to him and the proceedings is the only balance to that. I't wasn't the standard. I might've been around when it got changed but I don't remember. It seems off.-- Vista  +1  17:20, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

ugh. if it turns out someone placed that line in there by himself, wont we be getting alot of people screaming for retrials?--'BP^Tmz 17:22, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Its been there since at least march 06, which is as far back as the history goes. --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 17:25, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

It's probably my memory that is going, then. Seems strange as it seems so open to abuse. I've seen that there's a rule change under voting to change this page I'll have to look into that.-- Vista  +1  18:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

It wasn't there originally but it's been that way for a long time. It's not completely open to abuse, because it still allows for people to reject arbitrators.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 17:00, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

What is the case--Karek^maps?! 15:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Y'know, i dont like finis at all (Actually, i dont like very many people on the wiki at all), but Lh778 ticked me off. Id gladly represent finis to knock the bugger down a peg or two. --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 16:29, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, If you haven't choosen an arbiter yet, I'll throw my hat in. --Seventythree^Talk 00:07, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

And if a representative is needed I'll do the job. If Lh778 is still interested in this and wont object to 73 we can start now and end this quickly. Somebody please notify him.-- Vista  +1  00:15, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

But i want to represent finis, and to be blunt, i have a better grasp of the case than you do, given that im technically involved in trying to break this down. --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 00:26, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

So...that's 3 Arbitrators who volunteered...and 3 reps who volunteered...Make your pick. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 00:40, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I messaged him. Maybe he's offline. Oh well, this can be sorted out just as well to-morrow.--Seventythree^Talk 00:40, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't mind 73 being the arbitrator. --_LH779 02:51, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

He has chosen, I will not accept 73 as arbitrator, sorry but your past cases make me very untrusting of your approach to arbitration. I'd also like it if anyone who wishes to volunteer to arbitrate will provide a list of cases they have arbitrated on in the past so we aren't just choosing blind here. I want an arbitrator who respects arbitration.--Karek^maps?! 07:26, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

guess that means i'm out. as this would be my first case. but you gotta start somewhere.--'BP^Tmz 12:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I volunteer as an arbitrator because I have no idea what the hell this is all about or who these people are and hence no bias towards either of them.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 17:07, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I accept The General, if Lh778 agrees we can begin.--Karek^maps?! 18:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I'd rather accept BP as arbitrator. Would you have any problems with that? --_LH779 02:26, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Many.--Karek^maps?! 08:52, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Well I wouldn't accept the General either. --_LH779 12:25, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I offer my services as a totally unbiased arbitrator.--Jed 12:55, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Is there a reason for that? I believe you said you would accept anyone except for Grim?--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 14:06, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

That's a joke right J3D? Few arbitrators could be more biased in this case than you considering your history with Finis.--Karek^maps?! 14:28, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh for crying out loud! Agree on an arbitrator already! How bout me? My name was first in the mix... --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 15:20, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Axe Hack, it's only been two days, and No, I'm not gonna agree to you.--Karek^maps?! 15:36, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Why not? I'm in high school and I've taken classes in law...(Law, Mock Trial, and Moot Court to be precise). I think I might make a good arbitrator. After all...I do have some lawyering/jurying experience...though not much... --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 15:38, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

This is not a case for a first time Arbitrator. --Karek^maps?! 15:44, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, oh, I volunteer! I haven't had enough drama today, so I'm volunteering to up my drama intake.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 23:02, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

If you want me, I can arbitrate this case. As you requested, here I link the only case I have arbitrated (may I add, sucessfully) so far: The General vs Hagnat. I can assure both parties that I won't overstep my place as an Arbitrator with ridiculous rulings not pertaining the case boundaries, I will follow proper procedure almost to the extreme and I won't take an exceedingly long ammount of time to reach the ruling as long as you don't dissappear yourselves. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 02:11, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I am actually willing to accept Matthewfarenheit, he knows the rules of the wiki well enough.--Karek^maps?! 05:59, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Lh778, are you willing to have me as Arbitrator in this case? --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 17:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I'd accept Matthew. --_LH779 05:18, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Arbitration

As both parties have accepted me as their Arbitrator, the arbitration process will now start. I'll request an initial statement from both parties, and after that I'll make space for rebuttals. In order to promote a fair process no steps will be skipped, so if you have no need for rebuttals or you think that you have nothing to be added that hasn't been already said, just say so and I'll act accordingly.

A side word pertaining Finis Valorum's party: as you have accepted to be representated by Karek, and in order not to disrupt the case, he'll be the one presenting both your statement and rebuttal, and any other part of this arbitration case that I feel necessary to request before the final ruling. Your input may be added indirectly by your representative but, in order to discourage unfailrly doubling statements and rebuttals, you are under no circumstances allowed to post on your own on the case until a ruling has been reached. After the ruling is made, you may as well make any number of questions you want about it and generally act as your own representative from then on if you wish so.

Lh778 case

Explain here the nature of your case against Finis Valorum, presenting any evidence that pertains the case in this your initial statement.

Finis Valorum's representative case

After Lh778 is done with his initial statement, insert here your defense and whatever proofs you have against his case.

Arbitrator's statement

After your initial statements are made, I'll review each of the parties evidence, inform you of that event here and then make space for the rebuttals. Please be polite and don't reply to each other's statements as this is not a discussion. I'll ask members of the community to be polite too and don't add replies on the case themselves: if you feel that you need to make an statement, do it on my talk page and then I'll move it here if it has any value to the case. As a final note, I'd like to remember Finis not to double the statements and/or rebuttals as I have told him above.

Administration

Since all parties involved in this case have not displayed interest in following with the arbitration, this case has been dismissed. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 21:37, 29 January 2008 (UTC)