Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pudgenet/Proposed decision

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

all proposed

After considering /Evidence and discussing proposals with other arbitrators, parties and others at /Workshop place proposals which are ready for voting here.

Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or abstain.

  • Only items that receive a majority "support" vote will be passed.
  • Items that receive a majority "oppose" vote will be formally rejected.
  • Items that do not receive a majority "support" or "oppose" vote will be open to possible amendment by any Arbitrator if she/he so chooses. After the amendment process is complete, the item will be voted on one last time.

Conditional votes for or against and abstentions should be explained by the Arbitrator before or after his/her time-stamped signature. For example, an Arbitrator can state that she/he would only favor a particular remedy based on whether or not another remedy/remedies were passed.

On this case, no arbitrators are recused and 5 are inactive, so 5 votes are a majority.

For all items

Proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on. Non-Arbitrators may comment on the talk page.

Contents

[edit] Motions and requests by the parties

Place those on /Workshop.

[edit] Proposed temporary injunctions

Four net "support" votes needed to pass (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first vote is normally the fastest an injunction will be imposed.

[edit] Template

1) {text of proposed orders}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Proposed final decision

[edit] Proposed principles

[edit] Civility and personal attacks

1) Editors are expected to be reasonably courteous to other users and to avoid personal attacks Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:No personal attacks.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Assume good faith

2) Editors are expected to assume good faith towards other editors.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Participation in dispute resolution in good faith

3) Users are expected to participate in the give and take of Wikipedia's dispute resolution procedures in good faith, especially in the earlier steps of negotiation and consulting with other users regarding sources.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Tendentious editing

4) Users who disrupt Wikipedia by tendentious editing and edit warring may be banned from the affected articles. In extreme cases they may be banned from the site.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Mediation is voluntary

5) Mediation is voluntary at every stage, including whether to participate, whether to accept a given mediator, whether to accept the result, and so on.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Experts

6) Experts are welcome and are encouraged to edit with respect to subjects they have professional expertise and experience in. However that participation does not trump participation by others or the obligation by the expert to cite reliable and verifiable sources and to courteously engage in negotiation and other aspects of Wikipedia's dispute resolution process.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Framing a content dispute as a behavior dispute

7) Framing a dispute which, at bottom, is about content as a behavior dispute does not, however many behavior problems might exist, change its essential nature. It will be treated as a content dispute.

Support:
  1. Indeed. Fred, did you mean to support this? James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  2. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. Fred Bauder 13:36, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Proposed findings of fact

[edit] Content dispute regarding Perl

1) Barry is involved on the losing side of a content dispute at Perl. He seeks relief regarding content which we are unable to grant, see [1] and the first and third temporary injunctions proposed by Barry.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Tendentious editing by Barry

2) Barry has engaged in tendentious editing of Perl and with respect to prominent members of the Perl community.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Role of Pudgenet with respect to Perl

3) According to Pudgnet he is a significant figure with respect to Perl [2], [3] and [4].

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Pudgenet has engaged in incivility

4) Over a period of six months there have repeated violations of WP:CIVIL by Pudgenet [5], see Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pudgenet/Evidence#History of incivility.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Pudgenet has engaged in personal attacks

5) Pudgenet has made accusatory comments, negative personal comments and profanity directed against another editor in violation of WP:NPA [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], and [11].

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Failure to communicate

6) Pudgenet has failed to communicate appropriately with users he has disagreements with [12].

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Barry has made inappropriate accusations of vandalism

7) Faced with incivility and a content disagreement with Pudgenet [13] Barry responded with Template:Blatantvandal [14]. Of the numerous canned messages Barry could have used (Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace) this one was perhaps the one least likely to produce a change in behavior. He then engaged in a quarrel with Scarpia (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log), another Perl guru, posting this personal attack at Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles. Following Pudgenet's reaction [15] Barry followed up with a second Blantantvandal embellished with complaints and threats [16].

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Personal attacks by Barry

8) Barry has made personal attacks on Scarpia, another Perl guru, characterizing him as a "Wikipedia vandal" with respect to his editing of Perl [17].

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Pudgenet "bans" Barry

9) Frustrated by Barry's editing and complaints, Pudgenet issued a "ban" on Barry editing Perl [18].

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. Though perhaps we should spell out why this was not so, rather than just use quotes. :-) James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Proposed remedies

Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.

[edit] Barry banned from Perl

1) Barry is banned indefinitely from Perl and its talk page and from making any edit with respect to Pudgenet or Scarpia.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Pudgenet banned for personal attacks

2) Pudgenet is banned one day for personal attacks and warned to respond courteously to editing conflicts or provocation.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
  1. Not sure that we need to go that far in a slap on the wrist. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  2. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. Per James. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Abstain:
  1. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pudgenet warned

3) Pudgenet is warned that, whatever his status on the Internet at large, here he is just another user, and a newbie at that. Further disruptive behavior will be dealt with harshly. Play nice.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. Slightly fleshed out. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
  1. I really don't like the tone of this. The arbcom doesn't exist to "put people in their place". I think the proposed general probation is justified, and if enacted, makes the point well enough. Could support if rewritten. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
    It certainly isn't particularly polite, no, but the message doesn't seem to be made "well enough" in general - or, at least, doesn't often get through. James F. (talk) 21:28, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
  2. Per Kat. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Abstain:
  1. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] All parties warned

3.1) All parties are warned that status elsewhere does not grant status on Wikipedia and that all editors must be civil and refrain from disruption.

Support:
  1. Perhaps this is a better way to phrase? Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  2. Fred Bauder 02:52, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Much better. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 03:42, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. SimonP 00:08, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
  7. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Pudgenet placed on personal attack parole

4) Pudgenet is placed on personal attack parole. If he makes personal attacks he may be briefly banned, up to a week in the event of repeat offenses. After 5 bans the maximum ban shall increase to one year. All bans to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pudgenet#Log of blocks and bans

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 00:58, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Pudgenet placed on Wikipedia:Probation

5) Pudgenet is placed on Probation for one year. He may be banned by any administrator from any page which he disrupts by tendentious editing, edit warring, or incivility. All bans are to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pudgenet#Log of blocks and bans.

Support:
  1. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  2. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. James F. (talk) 21:29, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
  1. A slap on the wrist and a stern warning is all that is appropriate. Fred Bauder 19:59, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  2. this time, but not again. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Abstain:

[edit] Proposed enforcement

[edit] Enforcement by block

1) The bans imposed by this decision may be enforced by brief blocks, up to a week in the event of repeat offenses. After 5 blocks, the maximum block shall increase to one year. All blocks are to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pudgenet#Log of blocks and bans.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. SimonP 15:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:50, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Jayjg (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Dmcdevit·t 03:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. ➥the Epopt 18:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Discussion by Arbitrators

[edit] General

[edit] Motion to close

[edit] Implementation notes

Clerks and arbitrators should use this section to clarify their understanding of the final decision--at a minimum, a list of items that have passed. Additionally, a list of which remedies are conditional on others (for instance a ban that should only be implemented if a mentorship should fail), and so on. Arbitrators should not pass the motion until they are satisfied with the implementation notes.

  • Principles: all pass 9-0
  • Findings: all pass 9-0
  • Remedies: 1 (Barry banned from Perl) and 4 (Pudgenet placed on personal attack parole) pass 9-0. 3.1 (All parties warned) has passes 7-0. 5 (Pudgenet placed on Wikipedia:Probation) passes 5-3. All others fail.
  • Enforcement: passes 9-0.

[edit] Vote

Four net "support" votes needed to close case (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first motion is normally the fastest a case will close.

  1. Close case. Neutralitytalk 19:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
  2. Close Fred Bauder 16:49, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
  3. Close. Jayjg (talk) 19:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
  4. Close. Dmcdevit·t 07:00, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
  5. Close. - SimonP 12:01, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
  6. Close Raul654 02:39, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
  7. Close ➥the Epopt 02:41, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
  8. Close. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 09:47, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/e/q/Wikipedia%7ERequests_for_arbitration_Pudgenet_Proposed_decision_ca81.html"