Guild Wars Wiki:Arbitration committee/2008-11-01-User:Shard

Issue at hand

Shard (talk • contribs • logs • block log) stands accused of repeated personal attacks, harassment, and varying degrees of trolling primarily directed towards ArenaNet employees (who also contribute to the wiki), despite several warnings and blocks.

Decision about accepting the case for arbitration

The case for or against acceptance is on the discussion page.

Defer to sysop resolution. While I believe that there is reason for concern in this matter, I do not think that it is a situation which cannot be handled within sysop means. I see no reason why sysops should not continue to block the named user if they continue to post on talk pages in a manner which disrupts the core goal of the wiki (documenting the existing game) in the name of some other goal (effecting a change in the game) after having been warned that their posting is disruptive. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 08:38, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Decline. It is obvious there is a problem. Even if there weren't links to other pages, the heat generated on the talk page of this ArbComm request alone is indicative that there is a problem. However, accepting this case would be saying that sysops do not have the authority to handle it, and it's pretty clear to me that it's still well within their scope. Some suggested that a long-term or permanent ban by the sysops without an ArbComm ruling would be an "abuse of power", which is simply wrong, as long as the sysops have reasonable cause to do so. This ArbComm request was brought by a sysop and supported by another sysop, I assume because they don't want to appear to be acting on their own improperly, so to the sysops I say: it's still your ball. Do as you see fit. - Tanetris 16:07, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Decline. Sysops are empowered to block users as they deem necessary to reduce or minimize disruption to the wiki and its community. Disruptive users warrant bans to discourage their disruptive behavior, regardless of whether said disruption is personal in nature or not, direct or indirect. -- ab.er.rant 03:19, 6 November 2008 (UTC)