[WikiEN-l] MONGO and the ArbCom
Puppy
puppy at KillerChihuahua.com
Tue Dec 12 11:23:18 UTC 2006
NSLE: I suggest you reconsider your position with this in mind - your
name is almost certainly not NSLE or Chacor. I know my r/w name is not
KillerChihuahua. The majority of Wikipedians and Wikipedia
administrators do not contribute under their real names, and for good
reason. The same logic which makes using a "handle" on Wikipedia in
general a Good Idea also applies here. MONGO has been the target of
massive trolling and harassment. It shows good sense to try to insulate
oneself from becoming a target of the same people, and the Concerned
Wikipedian is doing precisely that. I fail to see how that makes his or
her concern any less valid. How precisely are you defining this as
"trolling"? I see no trolling, and would appreciate it if you would
share your logic with me and the others on this list, as apparently I
have missed something.
NSLE (Wikipedia) wrote:
> Hear, hear. Good decision. Seriously, the second I saw "Concerned
> Wikipedian" as the person I knew that this would be something trollish like
> this. Seriously now, make the plea openly instead of hiding behind
> "Concerned Wikipedian".
>
> On 12/12/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
>
>> I would be much more inclined to intervene if you were willing to put
>> your reputation on the line and make the defense publicly, rather than
>> under a pseudonym and throwaway email address.
>>
>> Concerned Wikipedian wrote:
>>
>>> Mr Wales,
>>>
>>> I am hereby writing to you to express my displeasure and discontent at
>>> "your" Arbitration Committee's decision to desysop MONGO, one of the
>>>
>> most
>>
>>> dedicated and resilient users Wikipedia has ever seen.
>>>
>>> MONGO has had to put up with every kind of harassment you could think
>>>
>> of; by
>>
>>> definition of [[WP:HA]], a number of users that have forced him into his
>>> mental decline should have been blocked and/or banned ages ago.
>>>
>>> So, I officially protest this decision, and wish you to evaluate it.
>>>
>> Given
>>
>>> your ability to veto any decision made by the AC, I hereby request that
>>>
>> if
>>
>>> you agree with my sentiment, you use this to stop Wikipedia from losing
>>>
>> yet
>>
>>> another prolific administrator and user to the abyss of trolls and
>>>
>> vandals -
>>
>>> RickK springs to mind as another.
>>>
>>> Last time I checked, MONGO wasn't the only administrator who could, on
>>> occasion, skirt the guidelines of civility. I could name 15 or so who do
>>>
>> it
>>
>>> worse than he does, and yet it is him who takes the fall.
>>>
>>> MONGO stood up for NPOV, something you yourself should extremely proud
>>>
>> of -
>>
>>> Wikipedia wouldn't be Wikipedia without servants like MONGO who try to
>>>
>> keep
>>
>>> unverified rubbish out, in accordance with "What Wikipedia is not", as
>>>
>> well
>>
>>> as "Neutral Point of View". Further, your relentless push of making
>>> Wikipedia fully verified through "Verifiability" and "Reliable Sources",
>>> which I commend you for emphasising, was one of MONGO's ideals, and
>>> something he sought to try and create under your direction.
>>>
>>> There is no denying that MONGO may have overstepped his mark once or
>>>
>> twice;
>>
>>> I would be a fool to say so. What I will say, however, is your ArbCom
>>>
>> has
>>
>>> previously found that "occasional mistakes are entirely compatible with
>>>
>> [the
>>
>>> role] – administrators are not expected to be perfect". I believe that,
>>> given the crap, for want of a better word, that MONGO has had to deal
>>>
>> with
>>
>>> in his fight to uphold your, and Wikipedia's, values, he should be given
>>> leeway in this precedent.
>>>
>>> You yourself said that "The Arbitration Committee [...] can impose a
>>> solution that I'll consider to be binding, with of course the exception
>>>
>> that
>>
>>> I reserve the right of executive clemency and indeed even to dissolve
>>>
>> the
>>
>>> whole thing if it turns out to be a disaster. But I regard that as
>>>
>> unlikely,
>>
>>> and I plan to do it about as often as the Queen of England dissolves
>>> Parliament against their wishes, i.e., basically never, but it is one
>>>
>> last
>>
>>> safety valve for our values". I feel that it is your turn to stand up
>>>
>> and be
>>
>>> counted, Jimmy, to stand up for our values. Wikipedians are not perfect;
>>> administrators are not perfect, by the same token; nor should
>>>
>> administrators
>>
>>> be expected to be unflappable in the face of persistent, ridiculous
>>>
>> trolling
>>
>>> and harassment that MONGO has had to.
>>>
>>> Cometh the hour, cometh the man; will you be the man, or will the hour
>>>
>> slip
>>
>>> you by? I hope you can see the devastation that this would cause
>>>
>> Wikipedia
>>
>>> should you decide that the Arbitration Committee, which is becoming more
>>>
>> and
>>
>>> more dissented by members of the community as segregated, has somehow
>>>
>> got
>>
>>> this one right.
>>>
>>> The question you must ask yourself, in the spirit of IAR: If this
>>>
>> decision
>>
>>> will be detrimental to improving or maintaining Wikipedia more than the
>>> opposite decision will be, ignore it. You made this official policy on
>>> August 19, 2006 stating "IAR is policy, always has been". I feel that
>>>
>> this
>>
>>> is as good a time as any to apply its' principle.
>>>
>>> -- Concerned Wikipedian
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>
More information about the WikiEN-l
mailing list