User talk:Carolmooredc: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Two-way Interaction Ban: new section |
Carolmooredc (talk | contribs) →Two-way Interaction Ban: sounds good; also of course want exemption; where's go to place for violations?; comment to clarify |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
Sitush may agree to a two way interaction ban provided that any Arbcom action including filing, commenting on, enforcement, clarifications, ect are exempted. Such an iBan would include talking about each other, commenting to each other, writing articles about each other, reverting anothers edits, and commenting on ANI cases involving one another. Would you agree to those terms if he did?--v/r - [[User:TParis|T]][[User_talk:TParis|P]] 15:45, 18 September 2014 (UTC) |
Sitush may agree to a two way interaction ban provided that any Arbcom action including filing, commenting on, enforcement, clarifications, ect are exempted. Such an iBan would include talking about each other, commenting to each other, writing articles about each other, reverting anothers edits, and commenting on ANI cases involving one another. Would you agree to those terms if he did?--v/r - [[User:TParis|T]][[User_talk:TParis|P]] 15:45, 18 September 2014 (UTC) |
||
:Sounds good. I shall be VERY relieved. And I certainly would need the same exemption if ArbCom got involved with this silliness. My only question is, where's the "go to" place if he violates it? ( |
|||
:And I do believe, as someone said in last 24 hours, that ''if'' there is some general wikiproject/community-type discussion a number of people are involved with that we are involved with, we can generally comment on the kinds of points the other might make, but not specifically quote/reply/bait/etc them and thus must be ''very careful'' of anything we should say in any such discussion. Hopefully there will be little of that!! I never did run into him until last year anyway. Thanks. <small>'''[[User:Carolmooredc|Carolmooredc]] ([[User talk:Carolmooredc|Talkie-Talkie]])'''</small> 15:53, 18 September 2014 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 15:53, 18 September 2014
Green Box Links to Barnstars, Archives, Other Stuff
  See here for my Arbitration-related topic ban info. |
|---|
 |
 | This user wants to see everything in its place. |
Two-way Interaction Ban
Sitush may agree to a two way interaction ban provided that any Arbcom action including filing, commenting on, enforcement, clarifications, ect are exempted. Such an iBan would include talking about each other, commenting to each other, writing articles about each other, reverting anothers edits, and commenting on ANI cases involving one another. Would you agree to those terms if he did?--v/r - TP 15:45, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
- Sounds good. I shall be VERY relieved. And I certainly would need the same exemption if ArbCom got involved with this silliness. My only question is, where's the "go to" place if he violates it? (
- And I do believe, as someone said in last 24 hours, that if there is some general wikiproject/community-type discussion a number of people are involved with that we are involved with, we can generally comment on the kinds of points the other might make, but not specifically quote/reply/bait/etc them and thus must be very careful of anything we should say in any such discussion. Hopefully there will be little of that!! I never did run into him until last year anyway. Thanks. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 15:53, 18 September 2014 (UTC)