CrowsNest wrote:[Galloway] Took the high road. Something that is alien to the Wikpedians.
You don't think it at all conceivable that he didn't actually find out but decided to claim that he had for ulterior motives?
CrowsNest wrote:[Galloway] Took the high road. Something that is alien to the Wikpedians.
Not really. He has nothing to gain from it, and it would be a real pain in the ass to keep up that lie.AndrewForson wrote:CrowsNest wrote:[Galloway] Took the high road. Something that is alien to the Wikpedians.
You don't think it at all conceivable that he didn't actually find out but decided to claim that he had for ulterior motives?
We can only take action regarding what sanctions were actually placed......I do not see the need for even a formal warning. Thryduulf (talk) 19:59, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
The request is meritless. These edits and pages are not about British politics. I would take no action. Sandstein 21:22, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
The first remedy in the Arbcom decision states that Cross "is warned to avoid editing topics with which he has a conflict of interest", ....... --NSH001 (talk) 22:30, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
While Sandstein's approach to enforcement does come in useful, he sure does drop the ball sometimes. Still, I'd take that any day, over the routinely biased or predictably incompetent actions of others who turn up to play mall cop.No action. Sandstein 11:56, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
Philip Cross wrote:rm tendentious source by Milosevic defender, albeit in a usually reliable source
source