Gerard,
Did you read and understand my first comment in this thread?
You may be surprised to find that the board has indicated that WMF (or parts thereof, we
should not tar everyone there with the same brush) was indeed at fault in their handling
of this issue. I am inclined to accept this finding. I do not at any point claim that the
English Wikipedia community is without fault, which seems to be your implication.
Cheers,
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Gerard
Meijssen
Sent: 04 July 2019 11:11
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block
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(a)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(a)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_…
> >.
> 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_…
>
> * The WMF Executive Director (Katherine Maher) has also made
a statement
> <
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Katherine_(WMF)&di…
>
> .
> 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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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: