Bans without explanations are certainly not acceptible.
rubin
2015-01-20 14:18 GMT+03:00 Ricordisamoa ricordisamoa@openmailbox.org:
It is now clear that the superprotect affair was only a preliminary move. Now they hide themselves behind a collective account < https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:WMFOffice%3E issuing batches of global locks https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog& type=globalauth&user=WMFOffice&year=2015&month=1 and writing boilerplate replies https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk: WMFOffice&diff=10982297. As with the superprotect, the how is to blame, not the what. Note that I do not object global locks at all. What I object is the lack of a published reason for them, and the community interaction that Lila called so deeply for. They can play with the Terms Of Use, protecting any page on any project and global-locking any account "to protect the integrity and safety of the site and users", actually at their sole discretion. The breach of trust is complete now. The only thing that may stop me from leaving the projects for good is my loyalty to the volunteer community. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe