User talk:FT2: Difference between revisions
m →Requests for mediation/OpenNote: tweak |
m →Recent ANI matters: tweak |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
: In a dispute, the naming by one user that another person is "a party" has often in the past been used or taken as a confrontational gesture, with disputes in some cases related to aggrieved users who wake up one day to find someone has now listed them as a "party" on some other page of the wiki. We might not push people to mediation but we do hold the door in an open and reassuring manner. I agree that in theory it's neutral, but in practice I'd question whether it's the most ''reassuring'' neutral term that's possible. [[user:FT2|FT2]] <sup><span style="font-style:italic">([[User_talk:FT2|Talk]] | [[Special:Emailuser/FT2|email]])</span></sup> 09:21, 10 July 2009 (UTC) |
: In a dispute, the naming by one user that another person is "a party" has often in the past been used or taken as a confrontational gesture, with disputes in some cases related to aggrieved users who wake up one day to find someone has now listed them as a "party" on some other page of the wiki. We might not push people to mediation but we do hold the door in an open and reassuring manner. I agree that in theory it's neutral, but in practice I'd question whether it's the most ''reassuring'' neutral term that's possible. [[user:FT2|FT2]] <sup><span style="font-style:italic">([[User_talk:FT2|Talk]] | [[Special:Emailuser/FT2|email]])</span></sup> 09:21, 10 July 2009 (UTC) |
||
== Recent ANI matters == |
|||
If you're visiting my talk page to discuss some recent edits reported at ANI, I am aware of the situation but the matter has been handled by other administrators and is quickly closed. |
|||
In accordance with my commitment of December 18 2008, I will not participate in communal discussions or threads about it, except in the context of formal dispute resolution processes (if needed), since that could provoke engagement by the user involved. [[user:FT2|FT2]] <sup><span style="font-style:italic">([[User_talk:FT2|Talk]] | [[Special:Emailuser/FT2|email]])</span></sup> 23:25, 28 July 2009 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 23:26, 28 July 2009
- Archived talk page comments: /Archive
Closed topics are archived to approx. June 15 2009.
- Current discussion summaries
 For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.
|
Arbitration Committee proceedings
[edit]
Open cases [edit]
Recently closed cases (Past cases)
No arbitrator motions are currently open.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Summer Wikibreak
 | FT2 is taking a wikibreak due to busy things in real life. I'll be intermittently around and responsive to some things, but if it's urgent please consider asking someone else until I get back.
In brief I have a number of big "real life" matters all coming up (mostly good, I hope!), but I need to have a clear mind and a clear desk to handle them without wondering what's up on the wiki and elsewhere. At any rate until they're over, which could be anything from 3 weeks to 4 months.
FT2 11:40, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
|
just in case
I dropped a note in here :-) - hope you're good... Privatemusings (talk) 09:59, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Labrador Retriever
The peer review has been archived (though you should still look there for some constructive points on how to improve the article further). I have updated the {{ArticleHistory}} of the article at the talk page accordingly, at Talk:Labrador Retriever. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 22:49, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
DreamHost COI
Thank you for your thoughtful and insightful comments at Talk:DreamHost. If it is not inappropriate, can you offer me any advice for how I might be able to defend myself against this kind of stuff from a rather abusive user? -- Scjessey (talk) 01:41, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
In your e-mail to MedCom, you mentioned the changes you have made to the note to users opening a request for mediation. Your changes are a real improvement, IMO. I've made some edits; no big changes, just clarified a few points. I would say that the committee is generally neutral as to whether users wish to engage in mediation. We don't encourage people to try mediation, they must choose it. Often the more that choice is their own, the more likely the mediation will succeed.
I was puzzled by one aspect of your e-mail message: use of the word "parties." A definition that I am partial to is: "a person or people forming one side in an agreement or dispute." Parties thus seems to me the more neutral term as it deals with either agreement or dispute. That is the essence of mediation, don't you think: To turn a dispute into an agreement?
A minor point compared to your very helpful changes to the note. Thank you. Sunray (talk) 07:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
- In a dispute, the naming by one user that another person is "a party" has often in the past been used or taken as a confrontational gesture, with disputes in some cases related to aggrieved users who wake up one day to find someone has now listed them as a "party" on some other page of the wiki. We might not push people to mediation but we do hold the door in an open and reassuring manner. I agree that in theory it's neutral, but in practice I'd question whether it's the most reassuring neutral term that's possible. FT2 (Talk | email) 09:21, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Recent ANI matters
If you're visiting my talk page to discuss some recent edits reported at ANI, I am aware of the situation but the matter has been handled by other administrators and is quickly closed.
In accordance with my commitment of December 18 2008, I will not participate in communal discussions or threads about it, except in the context of formal dispute resolution processes (if needed), since that could provoke engagement by the user involved. FT2 (Talk | email) 23:25, 28 July 2009 (UTC)