This is a page for working on Arbitration decisions. It provides for suggestions by Arbitrators and other users and for comment by arbitrators, the parties and others. After the analysis of /Evidence here and development of proposed principles, findings of fact, and remedies. Anyone who edits should sign all suggestions and comments. Arbitrators will place proposed items they have confidence in on /Proposed decision.

Motions and requests by the parties

Template

1)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Proposed temporary injunctions

Template

1)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Ban on Privacy Violations Against Acharya S

In view of threats by ZAROVE to post information about Acharya S that would violate her privacy and pseudonymity, for the duration of this case, any admin may block any editor without warning who posts such information and may delete such information.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

This is not targeted against any one editor, and is not intended to be punitive but protective. Robert McClenon 12:52, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed final decision

Proposed principles

Template

1) {text of proposed principle}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Proposed findings of fact

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

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}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Proposed enforcement

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Analysis of evidence

Place here items of evidence (with diffs) and detailed analysis

Template

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

List of Evidence

Here's a long list of evidence that has been collected.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

General discussion

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

If you look over the evidence, you will see most of it is subjective, and muhc of it is actulaly false. IE, when I called her a "COnsiracy theorist", this is actulaly true. She is. He rbook is a COnspriacy theory.Liekwise, it has nothign to do withthe matters of arbityration. I was broguth before arbitration to settle the matter of mya ritlce and her privacy.Callign ehr a conpsiracy theorist doesnt violage her prvacy. Nor does callign ehr hate filled, malicious, ect...

Look at the eviodence. All he does is post quotes fom me, then say "Acharya is not" or "Achrarya does not."

this has nohtign at all to do withth case, and doesnt veen prove shes not what I claim. IE, if I call her a Conspiracy theorist, and James says "She snot a conspriacy thorist", this proves nothing.

Mosty all h is doign is quotign me sayign things baout her, saign that their not true, and usign it to prove a Non-existant obsession I have with her.But it has nohtign to do with the Case at hand.

How is it proof I violated her privacy?

Indeed, anyoen who rads just her website can see the vitorolic nature of her replies ot her critics, or to varisu gorup she opposes.

And, it has no part in this hearing.

he only thing that matters is supposed criminal conduct. Noen has occured. ( As a rpeorter I had accss to mateirals. It wa smy job.)

And supposed privacy issues.

As I have for the most part dropped the entire matter, I see no real reason to persist. Given thrat the evidenc eon James tlak page is nohtign but a lengthy personal attakc on my charecter, where he scies any instance where I say anyhtign he doeisnt liek about Acharya S, I hink tis safe to say that most of the "Evidence" is mooted.

Again, the only thing Im hdre for is the aritlc eon her life. Her privacy. My statements abotu hr maliciosuness, her vulgsarity, ect, ar emenaignless here. THey arent part of th artilce, and do not violate her privacy. THey do nto show me to be personally vested either. THey merley rflect my observaiton of her charecter.

Go date she has edited wikipedia and sent her legiosn to also edit it to secure the "Official aprty line' is th eonly oen told. Thats why I threatened to post the aritlce to begin with.

ZAROVE 04:23, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by others: