Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/168.209.97.34/Proposed decision

OneGuy and -lothario- are placed on standard personal attack parole for up to and including 2 months. If one of them makes any edits which are judged by an administrator to be personal attacks, then that person shall be temp-banned for a short time, up to one week.

We both get equal "remedies" even though the other user vandalized my user page and was continuously pushing POV and disfiguring Islamic pages as the evidence presented showed? That really makes "sense." OneGuy 03:47, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Regarding 168.209.97.34 vandalism

This was the second time that 168.209.97.34 vandalized Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/168.209.97.34/Proposed decision page.[1]. It should be clear that this guy will always cause problems and reverts. I already posted the evidence where he posted out of context verses then went into a revert war. I suggest another Enforcement policy. If 168.209.97.34 makes an Islamic related edit, and if that edit is determined as deliberately violating wikipedia NPOV policy, the admin can chose to ban 168.209.97.34 for 3 days. OneGuy 11:41, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Please note. OneGuy started this arbitration not to solve a conflict, but just as punishment against me for showing the other side of Islam. OneGuy is an Islamic Apologist to the extreme. He is using you all as a tool to silence me because I dare discuss the dark side of Islam. Please have a look at OneGuy's "contributions"; They are almost all efforts to whitewash the dirty side of Islam. Anyone who dares show the other side gets attacked by OneGuy and his Islamic tag-team. By entertaining his complaint you are falling right into his hands and being used as a tool to punish this infidel.

As of my "vandalism" I thought it was a valid contribution - After all, we are talking about Islam (When in Rome...). Seeing how one-sided the arbs here are - completely overlooking OneGuy's constant violations (such as the violation of the 3RR he had yesterday, despite being warned). OneGuy is able to spend lots of time and effort to attack me, yet I do not have much time to spend (waste?) on wikipedia as he does. Therefore, he is winning by a filibuster methods as well as personal bias by the arbs. The arbs have obviously not looked at his history and what other wiki users think of him. The fact that the arbs here are overlooking OneGuys violations while harping on mine is proof that they are not neutral (One arb here even posts on his user page that he is anti-american - that itself should disqualify him from any decision making in these matters).

Since this entire arbitration is a joke I thought I would continue the joke with my edits. Seeing the conclusions the arbs have come to, and what they have ignored regarding OneGuy, they have no respect in my eyes. Sure, they have the power to ban me and probably feel good doing it. If it will make them feel good (and it certainly would to OneGuy) go ahaid and ban me for a year. I couldn't care less. Go ahaid and ban all of 168.209 - or ban all of Africa.

So go ahaid and ban my IP. But do it soon because I'm sure OneGuy would love to brag about what he has done this friday as the mosque. Allahu Akbar!

No, I am not using arbcom as a "toll". You vandalized this page twice. It was not a "valid" contribution. If that was a "valid" contribution (see [2]), then you have a real problem understanding what no personal attacks, vandalism, and NPOV means. Your above response again is filled with personal attacks OneGuy 20:58, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)