Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Tobias Conradi/Proposed decision

;Active

• Charles Matthews
• FloNight
• Fred Bauder
• Jdforrester
• Jpgordon
• Kirill Lokshin
• Mackensen
• Morven
• Paul August
• SimonP
• UninvitedCompany

;Inactive

• Blnguyen
• Flcelloguy

FIcelloguy has returned but is not active on cases that were opened while he was away. BInguyen and James F are now inactive. Thatcher131 01:36, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

:Updated, Jdforrester now participating in this case. Newyorkbrad 12:06, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Typically in cases that have blocking as an enforcement tool, there tends to be some provision for escalating blocks if needed. Is that the case here but not stated? Thanks for clarification on that. ++Lar: t/c 01:57, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

: No, there is no ratchet mechanism in this ruling; I think it would be inappropriate in this instance, as do seemingly other members of the Committee.

: James F. (talk) 21:28, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

::OK, thank you for the clarification. There has been a lot of discussion about whether civility blocks can work at all, and this is a novel approach in some ways, the non ratcheting part being one of them, and perhaps the community would learn from knowing more about the reasoning if you are willing to share it. But in any case it's clarified, thanks. ++Lar: t/c 01:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)