I agree that they look like a very aggressive community, but why should an entity so disconnected from everything there and immersed on a culture of obscurantism and secretiveness be the one appropriate to intervene? Especially skipping due process, with a very shady ban, as seems to have been the case there.
Paulo
A quarta, 12 de jun de 2019, 14:51, Robert Fernandez wikigamaliel@gmail.com escreveu:
Because the English Wikipedia community is a garbage fire, and is hellbent on demonstrating that this week.
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 9:16 AM Paulo Santos Perneta paulosperneta@gmail.com wrote:
And why do you think the WMF would be the proper entity to step in on community issues related to the English Wikipedia?
Paulo
A quarta, 12 de jun de 2019, 13:46, Mister Thrapostibongles < thrapostibongles@gmail.com> escreveu:
Yaroslav,
I think it's reasonably clear that the English Wikipedia community and
its
community structures, such as its Arbitration Committee, and processes
are
not capable of maintaining a productive, harassment-free environment
for
the volunteer workers. For example, they have consistently failed,
after
several attempts, to handle the case of a volunteer who used the word "Cxxx" about a fellow worker, and the community has agreed that telling others to "Fxxx off" is acceptable. These are symptoms of a
dysfunctional
community, which tolerates behaviour that is unacceptable in any
collegial
working environment, and it is right that the Foundation should step
in.
Thrapostibongles
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 4:56 PM Yaroslav Blanter ymbalt@gmail.com
wrote:
The point made by pretty much everyone is not that Fram should or
should
not be banned, but that the process in this case should have
followed the
standard dispute resolution avenues, More specifically, the case
should
have been communicated to the Arbitration Committee, whose members
did
sign
the non-disclosure agreement.
This is different from the past cases when users were banned by WMF,
since
in this case it was made clear the case is based on on-wiki open
activity
of Fram (and, specifically, only on the English Wikipedia). The
on-wiki
activity is subject to the community policies.
To be clear, I am not a friend of Fram, and in the past supported
desysop
on a number of occasions.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 5:46 PM Amir Sarabadani <ladsgroup@gmail.com
wrote:
People who oppose the ban: Are you aware of all aspects and things
Fram
has
done? Do you have the full picture? It's really saddening to see
how
fast
people jump to conclusion in page mentioned in the email. I
personally,
don't know what happened so I neither can support or oppose the
ban. As
simple as that.
So what should be done IMO. If enwiki wants to know more, a
community
body
can ask for more information, if body satisfy two things:
- They had signed NDA not to disclose the case
- They are trusted by the community
I think the only body can sorta work with this is stewards but not
sure
(Does ArbCom NDA'ed?)
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 3:58 PM Paulo Santos Perneta < paulosperneta@gmail.com> wrote:
Lack of transparency from the WMF, whatelse is new. I'm currently under a funding ban secretly decided (by who?)
based
on a
false accusation, without providing any evidence. Until now I'm
waiting
for
an explanation from the WMF. So, this sort of attitude doesn't
surprise
me
at all. It is very unfortunate that the WMF apparently thrives in this
kind
of
medieval obscurity, the opposite of the values of the Wikimedia
Movement.
Matter for Roles & Reponsibilities.
Best, Paulo
Benjamin Ikuta benjaminikuta@gmail.com escreveu no dia terça,
11/06/2019
à(s) 05:45:
> > > > Thanks for this. > > I'm glad to see I'm not the only one dismayed by the
unilateralism
and
> lack of transparency. > > > > On Jun 10, 2019, at 8:25 PM, 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>
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>
-- Amir (he/him) _______________________________________________ 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
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
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