On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 8:36 AM Fæ <faewik(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Any Arbcom approved sanction against Fram based on the
evidence would not
be controversial for anyone.
Sorry for coming in late to this conversation; I've mostly been following
the sicussion happening on-wiki. But I wanted to pipe up to say that I
absolutely do not believe this is true (see also my comment here
<https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard&type=revision&diff=901559520&oldid=901559137&diffmode=source>).
To repeat my comment somewhat, the English Wikipedia ArbCom has in the past
had to place similar bans: that is, ones against long-term contributors
with many supporters, and ones in which the full details behind what led to
the ban cannot be revealed publicly. The reaction has been quite similar to
the one the WMF is currently experiencing—"star chamber" accusations,
claims that we've abused our power or the process, and assumptions that the
ban is unwarranted unless everyone is allowed to scrutinize the private
evidence. The ArbCom is empowered to take action based off of
privately-submitted evidence and private discussion, but in practice it is
extremely poorly-received when we do, basically across-the-board.
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GorillaWarfare