Robert,
These two aren't mutually exclusive. Yes, Wikipedia belongs to everyone.
Specifically, a place in the community of Wikipedia editors is open to
anyone who would like to join. Those of us here have already done that. But
it is natural in any community or organization to give more weight to
respected, long-term members than those who just joined up yesterday.
They've learned the ropes and demonstrated a commitment to it.
However, the project categorically does not belong to the WMF. The WMF
exists to serve and assist Wikimedia projects, not lord it over and rule
them. And since "Wikipedia belongs to everyone", we certainly shouldn't be
throwing people out in secret Star Chamber-style proceedings, where
apparently even the accused is not permitted to know all the evidence
against them. That is utterly antithetical to the open, community-run ethos
of the project.
Todd
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 8:09 AM Robert Fernandez <wikigamaliel(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
I am not
familiar with your name on enwiki, so I looked you up, and find
that you have a
grand total of 11 edits on all projects since 2015.
This is part of the problem right here. This isn't our project and we
shouldn't be trying to exclude people from our community. Wikipedia
belongs to everyone.
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 9:53 AM Peter Southwood
<peter.southwood(a)telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
> Thrapostibongles,
I am not familiar with your name on enwiki, so I
looked you up, and find
that you have a grand total of 11 edits on all projects
since 2015.
While it is possible that you have a long and
distinguished edit history
under a previous name or as an IP editor, it leads me to
wonder just how
familiar you are with the customs and culture of enwiki, which I freely
agree are non-optimal, but have evolved to sort of work in an environment
which was predicted to be impossible. Yet here we are, dysfunctionally
surviving when we are theoretically long extinct. Our dysfunctional mores
function as they do and evolve through surviving and occasional
modification by consensus of those who care enough to take part in the
process, within the environment in which we work. We are somewhere between
an anarchy and a community, and we do not generally appreciate
pontification from outsiders, which is what you appear to be, and to a
large extent, what we consider WMF to be. It is a problem. If WMF chooses
to rule by fiat it will have interesting consequences. So far they have
mostly avoided that, and when they have it has not ended well. If you
consider yourself an expert in something relevant I invite you to show
evidence of your credentials. Otherwise we will take your comments as we do
those of any other unproven internet commentator.
This is just my personal take, I do not presume
to represent anyone
else. You are as free to ignore me as I am to ignore you, but
engaging in
this discussion has its consequences, and one of them is to be questioned.
Cheers,
Peter Southwood
-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On
Behalf Of
Mister Thrapostibongles
Sent: 12 June 2019 09:06
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block
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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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:Fra…
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bureaucrats'_noticeboard#User:F…
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticebo…
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Commi…
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Commi…
> > > > >
> > > > > [2]
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bureaucrats%27_noticeboard#Statemen…
> > > > >
> > > > > Techman224
> > > > >
> > > > >> Begin forwarded message:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> From: George Herbert <george.herbert(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> > > > >> Reply-To: English Wikipedia
<wikien-l(a)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:Fra…
> > > > >>
> > > > >> 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(a)gmail.com
> > > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > > >> WikiEN-l mailing list
> > > > >> WikiEN-l(a)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(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>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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(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:
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>