Approximately 48 hours ago I closed an ANI thread as an uninvolved administrator. The thread concerned the behavior of one Joefromrandb (talk · contribs), whose disposition was...colorful, to say the least. At the time I had three observations, one concerning consensus, one concerning bad blood and one for the editing restriction list. After a night's sleep I decided I had an ethical obligation to follow up on the bad blood on the thread, and that's why I'm here.

At the time of the original closure, as an involved admin, I had assumed that the bad blood was of a vendetta nature - that two editors had a disagreement (they had) and the one with the admin tools had ended it. In my follow up investigation though I have found that community and Joe apparently do not get along well, if they get along at all. Joe's block log is massive, and lately there have been mounting demands for an indef block on ANI, some going as far back as 2013/14 (ANI reports include the following: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]; also located an rfc from back in the day), and in every case to date the blocks have been, for various reasons, declined or overturned, however the underlying issues still seem to be present. As much as it pains me to admit, this is beyond my ability to adequately deal with, and due to the long time over which this has played it its probably beyond the community's ability to adequately deal with as well. At this point it is my professional opinion that this matter should be referred to the arbitration committee for a thorough, independent, and formal investigation into all aspects of this matter and to better balance the needs of the community against the allegations of the editor. TomStar81 (Talk) 13:44, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Statement by Joefromrandb

Statement by {Non-party}

Other editors are free to make relevant comments on this request as necessary. Comments here should address why or why not the Committee should accept the case request or provide additional information.

Clerk notes

This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).

Joefromrandb: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter <0/0/0>

Vote key: (Accept/decline/recuse)

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 <noinclude>{{ArbComOpenTasks|acotstyle=float:right}}</noinclude>{{NOINDEX}}
 {{Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Header<noinclude>|width=45%</noinclude>}}
+== Joefromrandb ==
+'''Initiated by ''' [[User:TomStar81|TomStar81]] ([[User talk:TomStar81|Talk]]) '''at''' 13:44, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
+=== Involved parties ===
+<!-- Please change "userlinks" to "admin" if the party is an administrator -->
+*{{userlinks|TomStar81}}, ''filing party''
+*{{userlinks|Joefromrandb}}
+;Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request
+<!-- All parties must be notified that the request has been filed, immediately after it is posted, and confirmation posted here. -->
+*[diff of notification Joefromrandb]
+;Confirmation that other steps in [[Wikipedia:dispute resolution|dispute resolution]] have been tried
+<!-- Identify prior attempts at dispute resolution here, with links/diffs to the page where the resolution took place. If prior dispute resolution has not been attempted, the reasons for this should be explained in the request for arbitration -->
+*Link 1
+*Link 2
+=== Statement by TomStar81 ===
+Approximately 48 hours ago I [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=805618069 closed an ANI thread] as an uninvolved administrator. The thread concerned the behavior of one {{User|Joefromrandb}}, whose disposition was...colorful, to say the least. At the time I had three observations, one concerning consensus, one concerning bad blood and one for the editing restriction list. After a night's sleep I decided I had an ethical obligation to follow up on the bad blood on the thread, and that's why I'm here.
+At the time of the original closure, as an involved admin, I had assumed that the bad blood was of a vendetta nature - that two editors had a disagreement ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RRArchive352#User:Joefromrandb_reported_by_User:Toddst1_.28Result:_ANI_discussion_opened.2C_indef_.29 they had]) and the one with the admin tools had ended it. In my follow up investigation though I have found that community and Joe apparently do not get along well, if they get along at all. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=User%3AJoefromrandb&type=block Joe's block log is massive], and lately there have been mounting demands for an indef block on ANI, some going as far back as 2013/14 (ANI reports include the following: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive816#Proposed_Indefinite_Block_of_Joefromrandb] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive816#Proposed_Indefinite_Block_of_Joefromrandb] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive820#Request_to_review_block_of_Joefromrandb]  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive259#User:Joefromrandb] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive958#Continued_battleground_mentality_of_Joefromrandb] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive956#User:Joefromrandb] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive967#Long-term_gross_incivility_and_WP:BATTLE] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive813#User:Joefromrandb:_continual_disruption_after_RfC_and_block] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive759] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive774#User:Joefromrandb]; also located [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Joefromrandb|an rfc from back in the day]]), and in every case to date the blocks have been, for various reasons, declined or overturned, however the underlying issues still seem to be present. As much as it pains me to admit, this is beyond my ability to adequately deal with, and due to the long time over which this has played it its probably beyond the community's ability to adequately deal with as well. At this point it is my professional opinion that this matter should be referred to the arbitration committee for a thorough, independent, and formal investigation into all aspects of this matter and to better balance the needs of the community against the allegations of the editor. [[User:TomStar81|TomStar81]] ([[User talk:TomStar81|Talk]]) 13:44, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
+=== Statement by Joefromrandb ===
+=== Statement by {Non-party} ===
+Other editors are free to make relevant comments on this request as necessary. Comments here should address why or why not the Committee should accept the case request or provide additional information.
+<!-- * Please copy this section for the next person. * -->
+=== Clerk notes ===
+:''This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).''
+*
+=== Joefromrandb: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter <0/0/0> ===
+{{anchor|1=Joefromrandb: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter}}<small>Vote key: (Accept/decline/recuse)</small>
+*