He also wrote Agapetos angel s behavior has been fair conscientious and courteous in everything I observed I have not surveyed all of this editor s contributions so there may be things I haven t seen Based on my interaction I would rate this person as an above average editor responsive to feedback willing and able to act in the interests of fairness This leap to arbitration appears precipitous Isn t it normal procedure to begin with mediation or a user RfC I certainly know other editors whose behavior has been far more inappropriate who I wish were in arbitration Unless there is something about Wikipedia procedure I don t understand there seems to be nothing in these mild accusations to justify having bypassed several less severe methods of dispute resolution The speed with which this proceeding has reached this stage has the appearance of impropriety Some of the editors involved in the dispute at Jonathan Sarfati are administrators I don t know whether this represents actual influence or prejudicial treatment but this proceeding gives a strong whiff of something like that No particular dispute is important enough to compromise an admin s reputation for impartiality