The more I hear about this, the more I think this is something that
WMF needs to address at an institutional level (Board etc.) to resolve
these process issues and loopholes. Has this ever been taken "up the
chain"?
-Leigh
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Ryan Kaldari <rkaldari(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Risker
<risker.wp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
You know, I sat on Arbcom for five years, and there were several
occasions
when I practically begged those complaining about the behaviour of
certain
individuals to initiate a case....but nobody wanted to do that...
Well, you know I did actually take one of the worst misogynists on
en.wiki
to ArbCom,[1] and it was such a horrible experience that I decided to
never
do it again. After giving up a month of my life to the case and enduring
constant harassment during the process, all of the evidence that I
painstakingly assembled, presented, and defended was completely ignored
by
ArbCom, and instead he was banned for a year for making a legal threat.
He
is now free to return on the condition that he simply agrees not to make
any
more legal threats. You were actually on that ArbCom panel, Risker, so I
don't really understand your argument that taking incivil editors to
ArbCom
is a good idea. To me it is worse than a waste of effort, it is actually
counterproductive and an invitation to be relentlessly harassed.
1.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/C…
Ryan Kaldari
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
@hypatiadotca
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org