Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/User:Guanaco versus User:Lir

Shouldn't the remedy #3 be removed? #1 covers it and was more strongly supported than #3. Guanaco 21:37, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Guanaco, I'd suggest (and it's only my perspective) that both remain, since if it is established (as some suggested) that the community would reject the AC's decision to demand reference on the grounds that "the AC can't make policy and that's making policy", the 1st remedy would be rendered null and void. So in that case Remedy #3 would stand. I have no idea if that was intended, but it makes sense to me. Jwrosenzweig 22:49, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)