UDWiki talk:Administration/Arbitration/Amazing vs Rasher

There is not much about this arbitration case as the others, but we cant fake that we didnt see things happen between rasher and amazing. Thats why i propose we use the same arbitration ruling condrake gave to Amazing vs. Rueful;

1. Amazing is not to Comment on any page where Rasher can be considered an invested party (i.e. Rasher's User page, or any group of which Rueful maintains an active membership in wether he has posted recently on that page or not).
2. Rasher is not to comment on any page where Amazing is considered an invested party(i.e. Amazing's User page, or any group of which Amazing maintains an active membership in wether he has posted recently on that page or not).
3. Neiter Amazing nor Rasher are to comment directly to or about each other on any page that is considered "Community Property" such as discussion pages or sugestion pages.
4. Templates, or Pages (Other than personal talk pages)created by either party that exists (or may be perceived by a mod) as existing exclusivly to antagonize the other party shall not be created by either party.
5. Failure to Comply will be considered vandalism, and is to be reported to a Mod for removal.

Fair enough ? --hagnat ^mod 02:08, 14 May 2006 (BST)

Agreed. I pretty much burned out on these cases. I apologize for the lack of attention I've paid, but again - Severely tiring going through all the drama with so many people on so many pages. -- Amazing 02:01, 14 May 2006 (BST)

Is this a violation or not yet? -- Amazing 03:48, 14 May 2006 (BST)

Ruling Seconded--Vista ^W! 13:21, 14 May 2006 (BST)