Hoi, I am astounded that you write as if the WMF is at fault in this. What I find is that in stead of pointing to the WMF, it is first and foremost the community of the English Wikipedia who accepted the unacceptable and finally has to deal with consequences. True to form, no reflection on en.wp practices and the blame is conveniently put elsewhere. Thanks, GerardM
On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 at 10:48, Peter Southwood peter.southwood@telkomsa.net wrote:
Gerard, Is your response to my email intended to have any relevance to my statement? If so please clarify. Cheers, Peter
-----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Gerard Meijssen Sent: 04 July 2019 09:59 To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block
Hoi, The community is responsible for its actions. It is widely acknowledged that the English Wikipedia is a toxic environment. The community has not taken this on board, has not fixed the damage. At some stage an inflection point exists where the community if forced to reflect. Sadly, the English Wikipedia has proven to be unable to get its house in order nor does it show reflection that give hope for a better future. Thanks, GerardM
On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 at 09:32, Peter Southwood <peter.southwood@telkomsa.net
wrote:
The board does not manage WMF. It is not their fault when a department does something stupid if they had no warning that it was likely to
happen.
People who signed off on the ban decision may have reason to apologise, others not. The board is responsible for ensuring that the damage is
fixed
and taking reasonably practicable precautions for preventing a
recurrence.
Due diligence is their duty, not exhaustive diligence or micromanagement. Cheers, Peter
-----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Pine W Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2019 10:29 PM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block
Hello Wikimedia-l colleagues,
I hope that your day is going well.
There are some updates regarding the topics that we are discussing in
this
thread. I am writing this email in a personal capacity.
As a reminder, the English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee published an open letter on 30 June that was directed to the WMF Board <
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Community_response_to_t...
.
I will share a few quotes from that statement before providing some updates, and finally making some personal comments.
I am retaining the font styles that Arbcom used in its letter.
- "As of 30 June, two bureaucrats, 18 administrators, an ArbCom clerk,
and
a number of other editors have resigned their positions and/or retired
from
Wikipedia editing in relation to this issue."
- "If Fram’s ban—an unappealable sanction issued from above with no
community consultation—represents the WMF’s new strategy for dealing with harassment on the English Wikipedia, it is one that is fundamentally misaligned with the Wikimedia movement’s principles of openness,
consensus,
and self-governance."
- "*We ask that the WMF commits to leaving behavioural complaints
pertaining solely to the English Wikipedia to established local
processes.*
Those unsuitable for public discussion should be referred to the Arbitration Committee. We will solicit comment from the community and the WMF to develop clear procedures for dealing with confidential allegations of harassment, based on the existing provision for private hearings in
the
arbitration policy. Complaints that can be discussed publicly should be referred to an appropriate community dispute resolution process. If the Trust & Safety team seeks to assume responsibility for these cases, they should do so by proposing an amendment to the arbitration policy, or an equivalent process of community consensus-building. Otherwise, we would appreciate the WMF’s continued support in improving our response to harassment and hostility on the English Wikipedia
- "We feel strongly that this commitment is necessary for the Arbitration
Committee to continue to perform the role it is assigned by the English Wikipedia community. If we are unable to find a satisfactory resolution,
at
least four members of the committee have expressed the intention to resign."
The following are more recent updates.
- The WMF Board has made a statement
<
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Community_response_to_t...
- The WMF Executive Director (Katherine Maher) has also made a statement
<
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Katherine_(WMF)&dif...
.
My personal comments follow.
I appreciate the WMF Executive Director's statement. I think that her statement is a good starting point for further communications between the staff and the community, particularly the English Wikipedia community.
I was hoping for a statement from the WMF Board that was humble and apologetic regarding recent disruption that has stressed many people in
the
community, led to numerous resignations, and consumed countless hours of volunteers' valuable time. Perhaps I overlooked them, but I do not see
the
words "apology", "sorry", "regret", or similar words in the statement
from
the WMF Board.
In addition to an apology, I was hoping to see the WMF Board focus on supervising the WMF organization, which I think is its principal job.
I feel that this statement is condescending: "We believe that the communities should be able to deal with these types of situations and should take this as a wake-up call to improve our enforcement processes
to
deal with so-called "unblockables"." I think that many of us in the communities are aware of these problems. I do not appreciate WMF creating unnecessary and widely harmful disruption in its quest to do top-down social engineering. I encourage the WMF Board to develop humility,
refrain
from lecturing the communities, and consider how to support the
communities
in our efforts to improve ourselves.
I would encourage the WMF Board to ponder the harms that have resulted
from
WMF's actions. I hope that we see a public apology from the WMF Board.
Katherine, thank you for your willingness to have a dialogue regarding these matters, and your willingness to have a more cautious and
respectful
approach in the future.
Writing solely in a personal capacity,
Pine ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine ) _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe