i'll show you the relevance of them wp an user geoeg reported by user dicklyon result both blocked for hours dicklyon and geoeg have been disagreeing about an article where wp coi is a concern since dicklyon reported geoeg for rr he she is focusing negative attention on geoeg why is this not harassment wp an i spa milto lol pia pointed out a concern about a wp spa editor also focusing negative attention on them why is this not harassment wp coin spas and socks pushing pov pr and advertising on the chapman university school of law page this also focuses negative attention not totally unlike what i said justanother has done why is this not harassment you seem to buy into bishonen's belief that i am out to get justanother and thereby assume anything i bring up must be part of that campaign you are wrong in this case he was being disruptive while other editors were genuinely trying to resolve a dispute if this isn't being disruptive all that needs to be done is give a brief explanation why answers like this are acceptable q using reliable sources should this article have a section discussing hubbard's personality a rephrase ' should a one sided pov analysis of hubbard's personality based on a small number of critical sources and bordering on wp or synthesis be posted in the article as a work in progress or should a balanced npov and non or piece be developed in a sandbox by interested parties from all sides of the issue which one benefits the project there that is a more accurate statement of the issue please put your assumptions about what you think i'm doing and ask yourself if the arbcom meant to give justanother a free pass from having to abide by any rules that i happen to point out for crying out loud by your logic i couldn't report any violation of policy by him whether it's valid or not does that really make sense to you