Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Waldorf education/Workshop

message: Thanks for the explanation.
On the workshop page, you write:
:"Pete withdrew the motion. Let's be sparing with the accusations on both sides. You'll never be friends; that's established. What the arbitrators probably wonder is whether you can work together at all. And if either of you lack the self-control to collaborate productively then the question becomes what external controls to impose. Do you really want to introduce those doubts?"
I think that's the wrong question and a secondary question to put. The right question in this case would be - with regard to Pete and me - to what extent have Pete and I violated basic Wikipedia policies and guidelines in our editing?
These are two different issues, that the arbitrators need to judge separately.
Have I come to Wikipedia with any other goal than to help contribute to articles on issues that I in cooperation with an American Waldorf teacher have built a site on: Waldorf Answers, one of the few sites recommended by AWSNA (encompassing some 170 Waldorf schools in North America) with:
:"A site dedicated to providing in depth answers about Waldorf education for parents and prospective parents. This site also serves to clear up some of the misconceptions that may exist about Waldorf education."?
No.
Why has Pete come here? At my Talks page he has described his deep agression towards Waldorf education, telling he does not apologize for expressing it in discussions here. At his own waldorf critical discussion list he has told that he has come here specifically to take control of the article on Waldorf education and combat me, something he then repeatedly has worked at through repeated personal attacks, incivilites and debasing comments on me and what I write.
Have I made any personal attacks on him, been incivil or made any debasing comments about him? Yes once, when I had had too much of them, I told what I felt for a spur of amoment about them, before telling about it, leading to a number of further personal attacks from him. I think that's about it with regard to Pete. Once I also answered three incivil comments by DianaW in the same wording she had used, some weeks ago, after having gotten tired of them too.
But I'm not the only one he combats. He combats everyone that dares disagree with him, repeatedly acting like a Mastodont in the seeming view of one admin who has recommended him to read the Wikipedia article on this problem, repeatedly disputing the validity of Warnings for personal attacks by admins, completely replacing the description of a request for Mediation with his own, after the majority of the invited editors has accepted the invitation, making two of them withdraw from the invitation, and in this Arbitration case adding personal accusations to the description of the Arbitration after it has been has been requested, as noted by I think two other editors.
He also has come here, after divorcing a woman, that he (here at Wikipedia) has told is a Waldorf teacher, importing his agression here, judged by his way of expressing his agression towards Waldorf education and Waldorf schools at my Talks page, in a similar way he has imported his expressed since long personal agression towards me, that he seems to view as his personal arch enemy, repeatedly letting it free, basically any time I write anything.
The arbitrators need to judge our cases separately, as also Pete's way of relating to other editors.
While I have described the main problems as I see them with links in my introducing statement, I'll try to add to the Evidence page too, to provide the arbitrators with more details, not yet found at the page, as basis for their decisions.
Thanks,  Thebee 02:19, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What part of "Let's be sparing with the accusations on both sides." didn't you understand?  BTW, I've never mentioned my family here.  I arrived here because I was alerted to the fact that HGilbert was discussing my family publicly.  Maybe *that's* where you heard it.  I would appreciate it if comments about my family were not made part of this public discussion.  Thanks! Pete K 04:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll answer that at the Evidence page.   'Thebee 11:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I'm looking forward to it. Pete K 15:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are?  Thebee 17:47, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure.  I've been asking you for a week now to present your case.  I really wish you would do it. Pete K 19:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: For Durova

message: I am going to make just a few comments this evening as I am unable to participate at the level I was previously due to an ongoing family emergency. I don't know if this means I should pull out of the arbitration, perhaps an administrator or arbitrator will advise. I have read some but not all of what has happened in the past 10 days or so. I will add a few things I have seen that I have comments on but I will be unable in the next few weeks or perhaps indefinitely to reply daily and I will probably not reply in all cases to comments addressed to me though I will try when I have time.DianaW 02:12, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have put this to voting. My remedy is quite liberal, however, and, especially with new arbitrators coming aboard soon, it is hard to predict what will happen. Please monitor the Proposed decision and try to protect yourself should punitive remedies be proposed or supported. Fred Bauder 02:27, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment by Diana

message: Fred, how about civility parole?  Think it would help? DurovaCharge! 23:48, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dare I ask what civility parole is? Pete K 23:57, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Something like the following.  DurovaCharge! 10:27, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't see any examples in the second case, but the incivility cited in the first case was extreme - not at all like what has been demonstrated here.  Do you really think the examples are comparable? (Merry Christmas, BTW)... Pete K 16:00, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Civility parole?