From my perspective of 4 years on enWP arb com, there is no question that
the enWP does not deal well with routine low-level harassment in the absence of something really awful. If it were done by the WMF using in-camera proceedings, , there would probably be more actual problem editors sanctioned, and probably more over-reaction and sanctions based on unfair accusations. Opinions vary about the relative importance of those two, but as for me, the probability of unfairness from secret proceeding by anonymous paid staff is by far the worse, and I see it as in direct opposition to the principles underlying the entire wikipedia effort.
If the WMF would assist the enWP to develop its own procedures, towards something that would be both effective and fair, *that* would be useful. The nature of this event causes me to doubt they could do it. For one thing, they do not seem to understand that sanctions of this sort teach the lesson only if they are closely related in time to the offense, not follow months afterwards--otherwise it is punitive, not corrective. Much worse, it seems they do not understand or value the concept of basic fairness.
I am not however saying that I personally find the actual sanction here totally unwarranted. The problem is rather that it sets a terrible precedent.
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 7:14 PM Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
You ought to read the entire paragraph. Such as the part where I explicitly acknowledged that Fram's version of events may be inaccurate or incomplete.
Todd
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019, 5:03 PM David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
If you really think Fram's framing of events here is even plausible, let alone the story, then you're less competent than I have previously considered you to be.
On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 18:47, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
According to Fram, the WMF told him his "interaction ban" was for maintenance tagging two articles, yes (and when I looked at the diffs,
the
maintenance tags were accurate and necessary). So, either Fram is lying
or
omitting something (and the WMF, for whatever reason, is not
challenging
him on it), the WMF lied to Fram, or they did indeed sanction him for
what
they told him they sanctioned him for.
Todd
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 4:37 AM David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com
wrote:
and you're *seriously* positing that the WMF would ban an admin for doing only what you describe?
On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 11:32, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com
wrote:
The only case of "harassment" apparently cited here was "I kept
writing
garbage articles, and someone kept flagging them as garbage!
Harassment!
Bad!"
If you don't want your articles to be flagged as garbage, FIND YOUR
SOURCES
PRIOR TO WRITING THEM, AND CITE THEM. That's rather a requirement
anyway.
The editor in question repeatedly failed to do that, repeatedly had
her
articles flagged for failure to do that, and regarded that as
"harassment"
rather than her own failure to follow the English Wikipedia's
policies.
Next time, she needs to find the sources first, and write the
article
only
after she has them in hand.
Todd
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 10:14 AM Robert Fernandez <
wikigamaliel@gmail.com>
wrote:
If someone is able to harass someone for years and nothing is
done
then
clearly community procedures are not “perfectly adequate”
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 11:36 AM Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
> This misses the point, as others have highlighted already. > > The WMF can and /should/ globally and permanently ban
paedophiles,
> terrorists, system hackers and people making multiple
cross-wiki
death
> threats or threats of suicide. There are perfectly good and > understandable reasons as to why the evidence behind these
attacks
and
> threats would be kept unpublished, it's seriously personal or
criminal
> stuff. > > The WMF making topic bans, interaction bans and limited project > specific bans against Wikipedians is a brand new invention,
which
goes
> against the pre-existing understanding that the WMF do not
replace
> existing and perfectly adequate community agreed procedures for > banning bad behaviour on our projects. Once full time WMF
employees
> start doing in parallel what volunteer administrators already
do,
then
> we should question why we do not *pay* volunteers
administrators
the
> same hourly rate and we are likely to see a mass exodus of > administrators. After all, would you, say, deliver the post for
free
> in your area for fun, but thereby take away decent full time > employment with a guaranteed pension for your local postie? > > If the reason for the WMF stepping in to ban Fram for a year is > because the WMF do not trust Wikipedia administrators or
Wikipedia's
> Arbcom to take sensible action in harassment cases, then they
should
> be raising that honestly and openly with Arbcom. If the English > Wikipedia's policies are not fit for purpose, or implementation
of
> policy is incompetent, we need a much bigger discussion than
whether
> Fram did something so terrible it cannot be named, but oddly
was
not
> worth a global ban but only the equivalent of a 12 month block
on
> Wikipedia while they are free to do whatever they feel like on
other
> Wikimedia projects. > > Fae > -- > faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae > > On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 15:35, John Erling Blad <
jeblad@gmail.com
wrote:
> > > > When you bad mouth other users there should be, and will be, > consequences. > > An admin got desysoped and banned after repeated warnings? So
what? The
> > only ting to be learned is that some people believe they can
do
whatever > > they want and it has no consequences, and other people goes
ballistic
> when > > consequences happen. > > > > I would have given desysoped fram and 14 days to cool off,
and
if
that
> did > > not work out repeated with one month. Banning someone for one
year
is
> like > > telling them to leave and don't come back. Someone at WMF is
clearly
> overly > > sensitive, but not reacting would also be wrong. > > _______________________________________________ > > 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
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