[WikiEN-l] Missed Opportunities to have avoided the Durova Case

[jayjg]

So now, in addition to the two aforementioned lists, there's some
other set of people "colluding" privately off-wiki to take action
based on e-mails to the lists? O.K., let's assume for the moment that
this bizarrely bad-faith theory is true. What on earth does it have to
do with Wikipedia any more? Wikipedians privately e-mail each other
hundreds, perhaps thousands of times a day. What do you propose to do
about that?

On Nov 27, 2007 11:35 AM, Relata Refero <refero.relata at gmail.com> wrote:
> You are setting up a false contradiction. 'Collusion', in Bryan's words,
> might have existed off the public list, once the evidence has been presented
> to the entire set. Matthew specifically laid that possibility open, in fact.
>
>
>
> On Nov 27, 2007 9:43 PM, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 27, 2007 11:12 AM, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
> > > Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 05:04:44 -0700, Bryan Derksen
> > > > <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
> > > >> A major line is crossed when that "private letting-off of steam"
> > results
> > > >> in administrators blocking users and then refusing to reveal why they
> > > >> did it, though. This wasn't just some private venting session that
> > leaked.
> > > >> If an administrator were to block someone with the explanation "I ran
> > > >> this by some people on an IRC channel and they okayed it, but I can't
> > > >> tell you who or where or why", that would quite rightly result in a
> > > >> furore. "Some people on an IRC channel" don't have any authority to
> > okay
> > > >> anything.
> > > >
> > > > I completely agree.  I think I've even said as much.  The point here
> > > > is that this would not mean it was IRC that was to blame for the
> > > > cock-up, it would be the admin's fault.
> > >
> > > I would also want to know who "some people" were, and whether they
> > > really thought they had the authority to okay this or if the admin was
> > > just blowing smoke about having their support.
> > >
> > > If Durova "simply screwed up", fine, her bad. But if there's a group of
> > > like-minded editors who were colluding on this and she just happens to
> > > have had the bad luck to take the fall, I don't want the rest to meekly
> > > and secretively creep back to whatever they were doing behind closed
> > > doors that resulted in this happening. I want to make sure this attitude
> > > and this bad process is rooted out.
> >
> >
> > Bryan, I've read through this e-mail thread, and in it I see both
> > Matthew and Guy saying clearly and unequivocally that Durova did not
> > even *propose* blocking !! on the private lists, much less get
> > approval for it. Do you think they are both lying?
> >
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>