User:Tristessa de St Ange/Mediation IRC

This page contains details relevant to the Ed Poor out-of-ArbCom-settlement and the series of IRC-based conferences surrounding this.

First Conference

Scheduled: 10:30, 5th August 2005 (UTC)
Commenced: 10:23, 5th August 2005 (UTC)
Concluded: 00:30, 6th August 2005 (UTC)

Agenda

No agenda was decided prior to this conference

Minutes (Brief)

The members met and discussed the points of view of:

Ed Poor
Rob Church
Uninvited Company
Phroziac

Conference was then adjourned to allow for thinking time.

Minutes (Detailed)

A full log of this, and other conferences, can be found at http://www.anubite.co.uk/edpoor.

Second Conference

Scheduled: 10:30, 8th August 2005 (UTC)
Commenced: ??:??, 8th August 2005 (UTC)
Concluded: 01:04, 9th August 2005 (UTC)

Agenda

Revise Points Of View (of Initiators)
1. Phroziac
2. Rob Church
3. Uninvited Company
Hear Point Of View
1. Nicholas Turnbull
"Findings Of Fact"
Proposed Action
1. Nicholas Turnbull
2. Phroziac
3. Rob Church
4. Uninvited Company
Ed Poor's Response To Proposed Action
1. Ed Poor's Response
2. Compromises
Conclusion

Minutes (Brief)

The members recapped and clarified the points of view of Phroziac, Rob Church and UninvitedCompany, and then heard the point of view of Nicholas Turnbull. Ed Poor responded to the points raised and the members attempted to propose findings of fact; it was unanimously decided to move to proposing an outcome and to "find facts" to support the proposed outcomes.

Minutes (Detailed)

A full log of this, and other conferences, can be found at http://www.anubite.co.uk/edpoor.

Third Conference

Scheduled: Undecided at present time

Scheduling

Please could parties post details of when they are not available during the forthcoming week (11-18 Aug 2005) so that I can schedule a final IRC meeting? Assume that the time will be 22:30 GMT (that's 23:30 BST, 18:30 EDT) as usual, for now. Rob Church ^Talk 23:00, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Ed Poor

Entirely free; no problems

Nicholas Turnbull

Entirely free; no problems

Phroziac

Getting wisdom teeth pulled on the 18th, not supposed to make "important decisions" all day. Is this meeting important?
- Not in a life-or-death sense. Rob Church ^Talk 00:07, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Rob Church

11th Aug - I may be out
18th Aug - I will be out

The Uninvited Co.

Date

Agenda

Motion to withdraw Request for Arbitration against Ed Poor

As a result of discussion via IRC conference sessions, we are satisfied that Mr. Poor's motives are sound and that he is prepared to pay more attention to community consensus in the future and take more care to avoid causing disruption in the Wikipedia community. On this basis, we feel arbitration would lead to no further gain and that Mr. Poor has shown definite remorse and willingness to modify his behaviour.

We, the undersigned, of Party 1 of the Ed Poor Request for Arbitration, hereby withdraw the request made to the arbitration committee for arbitration.

Signed:

NicholasTurnbull, Chair: --NicholasTurnbull 19:35, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
Phroziac: --Phroziac (talk) 20:51, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
RobChurch: ~~Rob Church 19:52, 10 August 2005 (UTC)~~
UninvitedCompany:

Expansion

While I retracted my vote above after reviewing several comments made by and to Ed, and several events brought to my attention by Uninvited Company, happenings in the IRC channel have altered my opinion once more. Ed announced he would "not rock the boat, rather, get on board" and that is, I feel, sufficient to warrant my agreement to retract the case.

There is a "but" - while I have included the relevant portions of the IRC log, I believe that Ed ought to make some sort of public statement, perhaps on his user or user talk page, indicating that this is what he plans to do. Therefore, my signature below is conditional that Ed makes good on his promises not to rock the boat.

I would like to thank Ed for his kind words; it was a pleasure to work with all parties in this matter in order to go some way towards darning up the moral fabric of the community to what it should be once more.

I, the undersigned, withdraw the request made to the arbitration committee for arbitration:

Rob Church ^Talk 00:29, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Phroziac (talk) 00:40, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

UninvitedCompany's position on this matter

I've thought long and hard on this and have come to several conclusions:

My judgement in trying to decide what to do about Ed is, at this point, clouded by my involvement. At this point, I have no idea what to believe about Ed, and least of all do I have any idea whether any sanctions are called for or what they should be.
I do not wish to participate in any further IRC conference sessions because the progress made thus far does not justify the significant time and effort they require. Further, pursuant to item #1, I am unsure what to say.
I do however believe that the recent matter of Ed's effort to pull rank with regard to Lucky 6.9's adminship, and his patently immature response to the criticism that ensued, is indicative that there may still be a problem; just as I believe that his restoration of the RFC is indicative that some progress may have been made.
It is the job of the arbitration committee to deal with these matters. It is not my job to do so.
I have no wish to be involved further in this matter nor in the decisionmaking surrounding it, and so have decided not to volunteer any further statements or evidence. However, I will answer any questions that are directed specifically at me, to the best of my ability.
On the other hand, I do not wish to make a formal withdrawal of the case, because pursuant to item #1 above, I am unsure that that would be appropriate, particularly in light of the fact that there are other Wikipedians who may have refrained from bringing this matter before arbitration themselves only because it had already been brought forth by me and the other signers.
I leave it up to Nicholas, Phroziac, and Rob to decide amongst themselves how they wish to proceed. If they wish to withdraw the case, I leave it to the Arbitration Committee's discretion whether or not the case should go forward.

In closing, The Uninvited Co., Inc. 17:15, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Rob's Response

This whole affair has been a lot of bother from the time Ed deleted the VfD. I personally am withdrawing from the case for one main reason:

Placing myself in the ArbCom's shoes, I feel that the ArbCom works to do what is best for the community. In this case, opinion has been divided from square one, with a number of people changing "sides" and so forth at a rate of knots. The whole matter has become entangled and confused; particularly with Ed also changing his stance from one minute to the next, probably, I feel, out of confusion; he is trying to do what is the concensus of the community. I would not consider it easy, if possible, to reach a decision based on what people want.

I do feel that Ed has now settled down, seen the whole ugly picture, and is doing his level best to straighten it out. I am confident that his quirky, idiosyncratic approach to management will in fact ease people's fears. I personally am convinced that the "light has dawned" and that Ed is ready to adjust.

I would like to thank UninvitedCompany for his help and support during this matter, and hope that this occurrence does not injure our opinions of each others' wiki stance. I will not attempt to urge him to withdraw from the case, nor will I leave him to "rot" in front of this bag of snakes; Uninvited is welcome to view any log he wishes and may also review the edit history of the page used when constructing the case and preparing initial evidence.

Barely a month into my wiki experience, I entered into a controversial dispute, confident that things would be resolved one way or another. Provided the condition I stipulated above is met, I see no reason to withdraw my signature.

Regards. Rob Church ^{Talk | Desk} 17:32, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

My long-delayed statement

Well, I've finally come to a decision. It's been hard, but I have had a lot of help. Many people spent long hours in IRC dialogue with me to help me understand the direction I need to go.

Then it took me quite some time to get myself actually attuned to this new direction. I've had some false starts, but I think I've finally settled into the new course.

Wikipedia is a flourishing democracy, so there is no place for people who flout the rules. I agree with this, and I shall from now on conduct myself as a model citizen - with or without 'crat or 'op rights. My devotion is equally to the project and the process.

I will no longer do zany or arrogant things like delete a major project page or defy consensus on a vote. Nor will I claim a right to "decide" such things; when it's close I will consult the others, abide by the consensus and let others make the final move.

But I'm also making this pledge unconditionally. I'm not going to run off and hide somewhere if the arbitration process results in an adverse decision. I must respect the process as well as the outcome, and I fully intend to do so. Uncle Ed 02:17, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

Useful Links

Request for Arbitration