Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Shakehandsman

Since this RFC was re-opened a week ago there have been no substantive edits to either the RFC itself or the talk page. The only position added at all is in opposition to the RFC itself, and has an equal number of endorsements as the basis for the certification of the RFC does. I see little option other than to close this RFC as No consensus/lack of interest. If these perceived problems should re-surface in the future, a new RFC may be filed or other dispute resolution pursued as needed. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:18, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural close: The user who is the subject of this discussion has elected to leave the project, making any sort of voluntary agreement on these matters both impossible and moot. Therefore this RFC is placed on indefinite hold, it may be re-opened should they return in the future. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:31, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply] Now re-opened per request on talk page. Again, this is a purely procedural administrative action and is not an endorsement of any particular position. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:34, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In order to remain listed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed. This must involve the same dispute with a single user, not different disputes or multiple users. The persons complaining must provide evidence of their efforts, and each of them must certify it by signing this page with ~~~~. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: 18:15, 4 January 2012 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 02:10, 30 June 2025 (UTC).

• Shakehandsman (talk · contribs · logs)

Users should not edit other people's summaries or views, except to endorse them. All signed comments other than your own view or an endorsement should be directed to this page's discussion page.