On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 09:09:49 -0700, slimvirgin(a)gmail.com
<slimvirgin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
From: David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com>
Temporary injunctions are for the specific purpose
of keeping the peace.
On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 13:50:10 +0000, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
An editor in good standing feeling mistreated is
the sort of thing that
makes volunteers fade away, so all this is a matter of concern. Temp
injunctions need to be applied with care.
David, one arbitrator has strongly implied that the policy of
tempbanning has been adopted in order to discourage editors from
seeking arbitration, and not simply to keep the peace.
That's not how i feel about temp bans. If I thought that a temp ban
was being proposed as a punishment for bring a a case to the AC then I
would vote against it. If a case was not worthy of my time, i wouldn't
need to punish people for bringing it to my attention, I'd just reject
the request and be done with it. Do remember that when an arbitrator
speaks on a talk page or in an email they are doing so as an
individual, they do not represent the whole of the AC.
Theresa