all proposed

Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or abstain.

Only items that receive a majority "support" vote will be passed.
Items that receive a majority "oppose" vote will be formally rejected.
Items that do not receive a majority "support" or "oppose" vote will be open to possible amendment by any Arbitrator if he so chooses. After the amendment process is complete, the item will be voted on one last time.

Conditional votes for or against and abstentions should be explained by the Arbitrator before or after his/her time-stamped signature. For example, an Arbitrator can state that she/he would only favor a particular remedy based on whether or not another remedy/remedies were passed.

On this case, [N] Arbitrators is/are recused and [N] is/are inactive, so [N] votes are a majority.

For all items

Proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on. Non-Arbitrators may comment on the talk page.

Motions and requests by the parties

Place those on the discussion page.

Proposed temporary injunctions

Four net "support" votes needed to pass (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first vote is normally the fastest an injunction will be imposed.

Template

1) {text of proposed orders}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Temporary ban on editing

1) Based on evidence of repeated removal of posts by others on talk pages, [1] -Ril- (talk · contribs) is banned pending resolution of this matter from editing any page other than his own user and talk pages and the RfC on him and this Arbitration. Removal of comments by others from the pages he is not banned from will result in a ban from those pages also.

Support:

Fred Bauder 14:08, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

David Gerard 15:12, 14 August 2005 (UTC) Oppose (for now at least), 1.1 should do for the moment.[reply]
Concur with David. →Raul654 16:37, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 13:49, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
James F. (talk) 16:01, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Abstain:

Alternative temporary ban on editing

1.1) For the duration of this case, -Ril- is not to remove others' comments from talk pages at all excepting his own talk page.

Support:

Fred Bauder 14:33, August 14, 2005 (UTC) (second choice)
David Gerard 15:12, 14 August 2005 (UTC) Yep. Note that we will expand this if needed. I would also ask -Ril- to please try harder to be civil in interacting with others, even if you think they really don't deserve it.[reply]
→Raul654 16:36, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 11:17, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
➥the Epopt 13:49, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
James F. (talk) 16:01, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Jayjg ^(talk) 21:17, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed final decision

Proposed principles

Template

1) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed findings of fact

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed remedies

Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed enforcement

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Discussion by Arbitrators

General

Motion to close

Four net "support" votes needed to close case (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first motion is normally the fastest a case will close.