"someone getting banned from a website over bad conduct issue" - Since the WMF has not clarified what that "bad conduct" has been, I wonder what was the educative value of that. Seems to have been only purely disruptive, and opened the door for all kinds of assumptions, and offwiki harassment of all "guilty parts" of anyone's choice.
Of the parts purportedly involved in this: One editor banned for one year, another editor not contributing to the project since the scandal began; and the Wikimedia flagship project in severe disruption - that's what this absolutely disastrous WMF intervention managed to achieve.
And "secret trials punishing people who don't even know they're being accused, not of what they are being accused" is not hyperbole, is fact. And I don't need this recent issue with Fram to state that. I've personally dealt with at least two situations which were factually that.
Best, Paulo
Dan Rosenthal swatjester@gmail.com escreveu no dia sábado, 15/06/2019 à(s) 20:32:
I didn't put my words in your mouth -- I quoted your own words precisely, and the implication you were trying to make is obvious; so respectfully, please refrain from gaslighting here. I simply suggested dropping the hyperbole of "star chambers and kangaroo courts", "secret trials punishing people who don't know they're being accused' and "very basic principle[s] of Human Rights and dignity" over someone getting banned from a website over bad conduct issues. You need not reply -- I'm done with this portion of the conversation.
On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 1:03 PM Paulo Santos Perneta < paulosperneta@gmail.com> wrote:
I have never said that this is a human rights violation, so please don't put your words on my mouth.
I have said that the general principles of equality, right to fair trial, not having ones honor damaged by baseless accusations, etc. which are present at the UDHR are being forgotten here.
Of course you may argue that since the WMF is a private organization,
they
are free to engage in this kind of secret trials, star chambers and kangaroo courts at will. As others already stated, the matter here is not if they can, but if they should be engaging on those schemes, as they are now.
Best, Paulo
A sábado, 15 de jun de 2019, 18:39, Dan Rosenthal swatjester@gmail.com escreveu:
There is no "very basic principle of Human Rights and dignity" to be
free
from the presumption of guilt by others. You may be confusing Article
11
of the UHDR, but this applies explicitly only to "penal offenses."
Unless
Fram is getting locked up in prison for his actions, let's drop the
absurd
hyperbole that this is somehow a human rights violation.
Dan Rosenthal
On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 11:35 AM Paulo Santos Perneta < paulosperneta@gmail.com> wrote:
People shouldn't be going with any random option, but rather presume
the
innocence of others unless guilt is proven by some legit process. It seems that this very basic principle of Human Rights and dignity
is
being forgotten. There is not the least appearance of due process happening there, but
that
has not stopped people from finding themselves their guilty part of election, using their own bias to evaluate the case. Including some Wikipedia related social network accounts that should
be
acting more responsible and wiser than joining the rabble in the
offwiki
harassment of their guilty part of choice.
Best, Paulo
geni geniice@gmail.com escreveu no dia sábado, 15/06/2019 à(s)
17:15:
On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 at 00:04, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com
wrote:
If you really think Fram's framing of events here is even
plausible,
What you are calling Fram's framing appears to be a the WMF's
version
of events as told to fram. The WMF does look slightly better if you remember that T&S arw trying to improve behaviour through threat of blocks not file a diff heavy arbcom case.
let alone the story
Given that the other versions of "the story" are T&S's PR waffle or conspiracy theories it understandable that people are going to go
with
the option that at least gives them something to work from.
-- geni
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