On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 8:36 AM Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
Any Arbcom approved sanction against Fram based on the evidence would not be controversial for anyone.
Sorry for coming in late to this conversation; I've mostly been following the sicussion happening on-wiki. But I wanted to pipe up to say that I absolutely do not believe this is true (see also my comment here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard&type=revision&diff=901559520&oldid=901559137&diffmode=source). To repeat my comment somewhat, the English Wikipedia ArbCom has in the past had to place similar bans: that is, ones against long-term contributors with many supporters, and ones in which the full details behind what led to the ban cannot be revealed publicly. The reaction has been quite similar to the one the WMF is currently experiencing—"star chamber" accusations, claims that we've abused our power or the process, and assumptions that the ban is unwarranted unless everyone is allowed to scrutinize the private evidence. The ArbCom is empowered to take action based off of privately-submitted evidence and private discussion, but in practice it is extremely poorly-received when we do, basically across-the-board.
– Molly (GorillaWarfare) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GorillaWarfare