This case was closed at 05:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
The reason given for closure was: Party has withdrawn from dispute; dispute resolved for other parties
Parties: If you wish to resume this mediation, please file a new request.
All parties should sign below, indicating that they agree to mediate the issue. If any party fails to sign, or if a party indicates they do not agree, then the mediation will be rejected. Only "agree" or "disagree" and signatures should appear here; any comments will be removed.
Eagle 101 (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights), an experienced administrator and user who has plentiful dispute resolution experience, has agreed to take this case after an offer was extended to him by myself, a member of the Committee. However, as Eagle 101 is not a member of the Committee at present, it is a generally accepted practice that the parties must consent to a non-Committee member mediating a RfM.
As such, can I ask that all parties to the mediation please list whether they "agree" or "disagree" to Eagle 101 mediating below, in much the same format as the initial agreement above. Voting will last seven days, from May 17.
For the Mediation Committee,Daniel 06:25, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
On hold due to two day block to one of the parties. I will resume with a reconfirmation on June 4. —— Eagle101Need help? 03:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Case closed due to Taharqa withdrawing. As there is no dispute remaining with the other party, this mediation is over. I would like to thank everyone for at least entertaining the thought of mediation, and for accepting me as your mediator. —— Eagle101Need help? 05:19, 8 June 2007 (UTC)