They certainly don't have the expertise. Most of them aren't regular participants on the English Wikipedia, and even those who are often dial back after joining the WMF. The most relevant expertise is participation in the project itself, and familiarity with how things are supposed to be done on it. They proved that they didn't have the relevant expertise, by utilizing an opaque, closed-door process when that wasn't necessary. Anyone with expertise in how the English Wikipedia operates would know that's a major no-no.
It takes no money to evaluate an ANI complaint or file an ArbCom case. So, while the WMF may have money, that's irrelevant.
The English Wikipedia community has far more people, in terms of Wikipedia volunteers vs. WMF employees, than the Foundation could dream of.
The Foundation has the responsibility to support the community, yes. Never to overrule it, except in cases of legal requirement, child protection, or threats of harm to self or others. And in those cases, the WMF and community are largely on the same page anyway--we don't want pedophiles editing, copyright violations on our project, or editors threatening to harm other editors, and the Foundation doesn't either. So in those instances, we're partners, not antagonists.
If the job of the WMF is to support the community, it has failed spectacularly and entirely to do so. It has done more damage to the community than any number of mildly nasty comments about the ArbCom ever could, with its ham-fisted, unexplained, unwarranted actions. It has also done serious, perhaps irreparable, damage to that partnership between the community and WMF, which was in none too great of shape to start with after the Visual Editor and MediaViewer/Superprotect fiascos.
I thought that at that time, they had learned that the English Wikipedia would not tolerate this type of action, having WMF actions crammed down our throat. ENWP administrators have never, to my knowledge, even dreamed of reversing an Office action before, because we trusted that they would be taken rarely and only in extremis. Now, two have done so (so far), and both have been enthusiastically supported in doing so. If that does not go to show that the community's respect for WMF has been put right in the toilet, I do not know what would.
Just look at what's happened there. I don't, to be frank, even like Fram all that well, and I know I'm not the only one. But this is not about Fram. It's about the community's editorial independence (and, from posts from Chinese and German Wikipedia users, apparently the editorial independence of their communities as well). And usurpation of that is not something we will take lying down.
Todd
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 6:46 AM Mister Thrapostibongles < thrapostibongles@gmail.com> wrote:
George,
There are five things that I claimed the Foundation has and the volunteers do not: responsibility to support the community, and the time, the expertise, the money and the people to do so. So that's ten assertions. You claim that some of those are unwarranted. There are over a thousand possible interpretations of your claim. In the interests of a productive discussion, would you like to be more precise about which assertions you think might be incorrect, please?
Thrapostibongles
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 10:22 AM George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
I think that you are making a number of assertions about the community, individuals, the Foundation, and the power and roles and responsibilities that aren't warranted.
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 2:15 AM Mister Thrapostibongles < thrapostibongles@gmail.com> wrote:
Frankly, I'm surprised by how surprised everyone is. The Foundation
has
the responsibility to support the community, and the time, the
expertise,
the money and the people to do so. Individual volunteers, however well-meaning, do not. The Foundation has determined that in this particular case the community;s own processes were unable to provide
the
support that the community needed, and so the Foundation has acted to
do
so, as you would expect.
Thrapostibongles
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 4:26 AM Techman224 techman224@techman224.ca wrote:
Forwarding to WIkimedia-l since WikiEN-l is relatively dead.
Since this message, an Arbcom member (SilkTork) stated that they
weren't
consulted, nor did this action was the result of Arbcom forwarding a concern to the office. [1]
The only non-response excuse from the WMF [2] was that "local
communities
consistently struggle to uphold not just their own autonomous rules
but
the
Terms of Use, too.” even though there were no complaints on-wiki nor
to
Arbcom privately.
The on-wiki discussion is taking place at the Bureaucrats and the
Arbcom
noticeboards.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bureaucrats%27_noticeboard#User:Fram...
<
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bureaucrats%27_noticeboard#User:Fram...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboa...
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Commit...
<
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Commit...
[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bureaucrats%27_noticeboard#Statement...
Techman224
Begin forwarded message:
From: George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com Subject: [WikiEN-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block Date: June 10, 2019 at 8:54:34 PM CDT To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org
In case you're not following on-wiki - Office S&T blocked English
Wikipedia
user / administrator Fram for a year and desysopped, for
unspecified
reasons in the Office purview. There was a brief statement here
from
Office regarding it which gave no details other than that normal
policy
and
procedures for Office actions were followed, which under normal circumstances preclude public comments.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bureaucrats%27_noticeboard#User:Fram...
Several people on Arbcom and board have commented they're making
private
inquiries under normal reporting and communication channels, due to
the
oddity and essentially uniqueness of the action.
There was an initial surge of dismay which has mellowed IMHO into
"Ok,
responsible people following up".
I understand the sensitivity of some of the topics under Office
actions,
having done OTRS and other various had-to-stay-private stuff myself
at
times in the past. A high profile investigation target is most
unusual
but
not unheard of.
I did send email to Fram earlier today asking if they had any
public
comment, no reply as yet.
-- -george william herbert george.herbert@gmail.com _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
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
-- -george william herbert george.herbert@gmail.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
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