For the second time this year and the fourth in the history of the Arbitration Committee, there are no requests for arbitration or open cases.
No pending cases
The closure of Fæ last week marked the closure of the last open case before the Arbitration Committee. This has only happened on three occasions: in 2009, 2010 and in May of this year. At the time of writing, the Committee has no requests for arbitration before it.
Arbitration cases do not form all of the Committee's workload, however, as there are four requests for clarification and amendment and one motion being discussed.
Arbitrator Kirill Lokshin proposed a motion requiring the alteration of any instances of an editor's previous username in arbitration decisions to reflect their name change(s). Any instances appearing within the:
enforcement log may be updated by any uninvolved administrator on request;
text of a finding or remedy may be updated by the clerks on request; and
evidence submissions of a case or other preliminary documents may be updated by the clerks with the committee's prior approval.
Amendment 1 concerns 6.1 and 7.1; calls for the modification of SightWatcher's and TrevelyanL85A2's indefinite omni-namespace edit and discussion ban from Race and intelligence topics, including participation in discussions concerning topic-editor conduct, to be a standard topic ban from Race and intelligence-related edits (broadly construed) with a clearly-defined route for appeal of the sanction.
Amendment 2 concerns 1.1; calls for the modification of Mathsci's admonishment for engaging in battlefield conduct to include an explicit warning that further battleground conduct (towards editors) related to the topic will be "cause for discretionary sanctions."