Jayjg is AWOL

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
130 messages Options
1234 ... 7
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Jayjg is AWOL

Frank Bellowes
User:Jayjg has apparently been missing from Wikipedia since August 4th
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jayjg, shortly
before an ArbComm in which he is named as a party formally opened.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Allegations_of_apartheid
Perhaps also not coincidentally, one of the other editors named in the
case, User:Urthogie, has also disappeared without a trace.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Urthogie

Unlike Urthogie, Jayjg is a trusted user and admin who has access to
tools such as Oversight and Checkuser and is also on the ArbComm
mailing list as a former member of that body. He's well aware of the
custom of announcing when you are on "Wikibreak" or "Wikiholiday" but
has not posted any such announcement.

Further, he is also now at the center of a very serious allegation
that he misused his Oversight tools in order to coverup an old
incident of abusive sockpuppetry by one of his friends
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive290#SlimVirgin.27s_sockpuppet.28s.29

The Sockpuppet case is old and evidently occurred when SV was still a
new editor though, given that she used an "alternate account" to
support her main account on various pages including "double voting" in
the instance of a Featured Article nomination, it would have been nice
had she simply publicly admitted her mistake and apologized. Instead,
she has sent out private emails explaining away the "alternate
account" by saying wikipedia was different then, she was new and her
double voting was simply a "mistake". I think we can excuse an old
mistake but a bit of contrition would have been nice.

In any case, the real problem is not SV's sockpuppetry but Jayjg's
agreement, in the past year, to coverup any evidence of this by
oversighting various edits.

Several respected editors have expressed concern about Jay's behavior
in the ANI discussion:

Gmaxwell: "Except it's already been before Arbcom and it appears that
they failed us. When oversight was first introduced the logs were
public. I noticed Jayjg's mass over-sighting of seemingly harmless
edits like spelling corrections with an summary of "pi". I brought the
issue up with Brion, who thought it looked odd so he temporally
removed oversight from Jayjg.  [23]. Arbcom looked at the issue, and
apparently decided that it was all okay. Jay's access was restored,
the revisions stayed oversighted, and he continued mass over-sighting
old edits like these. I trusted then. Having seen the evidence I think
it would be unwise to extend the same trust again. --Gmaxwell 03:03,
25 August 2007 (UTC)"

"Although Sarah's actions are old enough to be uninteresting, as Dan
pointed out above, the possible appearance of coverup is very
interesting and important and should be fully resolved." (Gmaxwell)

Thatcher131: "Overly aggressive use of oversight by Jayjg was brought
up privately as an issue when oversight was first instituted, but the
concerns were apparently dismissed. This should be looked into again."

Jayjg really needs to explain himself but he has evidently decided to
abandon wikipedia, at least for the period of the ArbCom case against
him. Apart from an initial post opposing the ArbComm taking on the
case he has made no contribution to the ArbComm case, not to the
Workshop or Evidence page. In the past admins who have failed to
participate in an ArbComm case involving them have been desysopped.

Given Jayjg's unexplained absence, his failure to respond to one
ArbCom case against him, the serious questions that exist considering
his use of Oversight in another matter and the possibility that an
account that has quite a number of tools attached has been abandoned
and may be usurped by a hacker I'm wondering whether anything will be
done? Will Jayjg be desysopped and have his tools removed (and be
unsubscribed from ArbComm-L) at least as a precaution until he returns
and explains himself? Will he be deemed to have abdicated his
responsibilities by refusing to respond to an ArbComm case against him
and refusing to explain the Oversight situation?

At the very least Jimbo should direct the ArbComm to examine Jay's
possible abuse of his Oversight tools and investigate other possible
abuses.  The dereliction of duty by a senior admin is a serious
problem which should not be swept under the carpet or overlooked.
Doing so only further damages Wikipedia's credibility in a year in
which we have taken a number of serious blows.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is AWOL

Kirill Lokshin
On 8/27/07, Frank Bellowes <[hidden email]> wrote:
[snip various comments about oversight, etc.]

Well, as we said on AN/I when this first came up, "the Arbitration
Committee is discussing the issues involved".

Kirill

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is AWOL

NavouWiki
In reply to this post by Frank Bellowes
He does not have to explain his absence.

Regarding adminship, the current practice is not to remove the bit for
periods of in activity.

Meta already addresses periods of inactivity
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Checkuser#Removal_of_access here.

Please keep in mind, this is a volunteer project.



Regarding the other issues;
Anyone is of course welcome to request arbitration on wiki.  I don't think
there is much we can do on this list.


Regards,
Navou

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Frank Bellowes
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 12:53 PM
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Jayjg is AWOL

User:Jayjg has apparently been missing from Wikipedia since August 4th
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jayjg, shortly
before an ArbComm in which he is named as a party formally opened.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Allegations_
of_apartheid
Perhaps also not coincidentally, one of the other editors named in the
case, User:Urthogie, has also disappeared without a trace.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Urthogie

Unlike Urthogie, Jayjg is a trusted user and admin who has access to
tools such as Oversight and Checkuser and is also on the ArbComm
mailing list as a former member of that body. He's well aware of the
custom of announcing when you are on "Wikibreak" or "Wikiholiday" but
has not posted any such announcement.

Further, he is also now at the center of a very serious allegation
that he misused his Oversight tools in order to coverup an old
incident of abusive sockpuppetry by one of his friends
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Inciden
tArchive290#SlimVirgin.27s_sockpuppet.28s.29

The Sockpuppet case is old and evidently occurred when SV was still a
new editor though, given that she used an "alternate account" to
support her main account on various pages including "double voting" in
the instance of a Featured Article nomination, it would have been nice
had she simply publicly admitted her mistake and apologized. Instead,
she has sent out private emails explaining away the "alternate
account" by saying wikipedia was different then, she was new and her
double voting was simply a "mistake". I think we can excuse an old
mistake but a bit of contrition would have been nice.

In any case, the real problem is not SV's sockpuppetry but Jayjg's
agreement, in the past year, to coverup any evidence of this by
oversighting various edits.

Several respected editors have expressed concern about Jay's behavior
in the ANI discussion:

Gmaxwell: "Except it's already been before Arbcom and it appears that
they failed us. When oversight was first introduced the logs were
public. I noticed Jayjg's mass over-sighting of seemingly harmless
edits like spelling corrections with an summary of "pi". I brought the
issue up with Brion, who thought it looked odd so he temporally
removed oversight from Jayjg.  [23]. Arbcom looked at the issue, and
apparently decided that it was all okay. Jay's access was restored,
the revisions stayed oversighted, and he continued mass over-sighting
old edits like these. I trusted then. Having seen the evidence I think
it would be unwise to extend the same trust again. --Gmaxwell 03:03,
25 August 2007 (UTC)"

"Although Sarah's actions are old enough to be uninteresting, as Dan
pointed out above, the possible appearance of coverup is very
interesting and important and should be fully resolved." (Gmaxwell)

Thatcher131: "Overly aggressive use of oversight by Jayjg was brought
up privately as an issue when oversight was first instituted, but the
concerns were apparently dismissed. This should be looked into again."

Jayjg really needs to explain himself but he has evidently decided to
abandon wikipedia, at least for the period of the ArbCom case against
him. Apart from an initial post opposing the ArbComm taking on the
case he has made no contribution to the ArbComm case, not to the
Workshop or Evidence page. In the past admins who have failed to
participate in an ArbComm case involving them have been desysopped.

Given Jayjg's unexplained absence, his failure to respond to one
ArbCom case against him, the serious questions that exist considering
his use of Oversight in another matter and the possibility that an
account that has quite a number of tools attached has been abandoned
and may be usurped by a hacker I'm wondering whether anything will be
done? Will Jayjg be desysopped and have his tools removed (and be
unsubscribed from ArbComm-L) at least as a precaution until he returns
and explains himself? Will he be deemed to have abdicated his
responsibilities by refusing to respond to an ArbComm case against him
and refusing to explain the Oversight situation?

At the very least Jimbo should direct the ArbComm to examine Jay's
possible abuse of his Oversight tools and investigate other possible
abuses.  The dereliction of duty by a senior admin is a serious
problem which should not be swept under the carpet or overlooked.
Doing so only further damages Wikipedia's credibility in a year in
which we have taken a number of serious blows.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is AWOL

Steven Walling
Navou is correct that a simple absence doesn't entail desyssoping. But
failing to respond to repeated attempts to engage for the purpose of an
ArbCom hearing most definitely has resulted in indef blocks, if not
desyssoping.

On 8/27/07, NavouWiki <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> He does not have to explain his absence.
>
> Regarding adminship, the current practice is not to remove the bit for
> periods of in activity.
>
> Meta already addresses periods of inactivity
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Checkuser#Removal_of_access here.
>
> Please keep in mind, this is a volunteer project.
>
>
>
> Regarding the other issues;
> Anyone is of course welcome to request arbitration on wiki.  I don't think
> there is much we can do on this list.
>
>
> Regards,
> Navou
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Frank Bellowes
> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 12:53 PM
> To: English Wikipedia
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Jayjg is AWOL
>
> User:Jayjg has apparently been missing from Wikipedia since August 4th
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jayjg, shortly
> before an ArbComm in which he is named as a party formally opened.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Allegations_
> of_apartheid
> Perhaps also not coincidentally, one of the other editors named in the
> case, User:Urthogie, has also disappeared without a trace.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Urthogie
>
> Unlike Urthogie, Jayjg is a trusted user and admin who has access to
> tools such as Oversight and Checkuser and is also on the ArbComm
> mailing list as a former member of that body. He's well aware of the
> custom of announcing when you are on "Wikibreak" or "Wikiholiday" but
> has not posted any such announcement.
>
> Further, he is also now at the center of a very serious allegation
> that he misused his Oversight tools in order to coverup an old
> incident of abusive sockpuppetry by one of his friends
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Inciden
> tArchive290#SlimVirgin.27s_sockpuppet.28s.29
>
> The Sockpuppet case is old and evidently occurred when SV was still a
> new editor though, given that she used an "alternate account" to
> support her main account on various pages including "double voting" in
> the instance of a Featured Article nomination, it would have been nice
> had she simply publicly admitted her mistake and apologized. Instead,
> she has sent out private emails explaining away the "alternate
> account" by saying wikipedia was different then, she was new and her
> double voting was simply a "mistake". I think we can excuse an old
> mistake but a bit of contrition would have been nice.
>
> In any case, the real problem is not SV's sockpuppetry but Jayjg's
> agreement, in the past year, to coverup any evidence of this by
> oversighting various edits.
>
> Several respected editors have expressed concern about Jay's behavior
> in the ANI discussion:
>
> Gmaxwell: "Except it's already been before Arbcom and it appears that
> they failed us. When oversight was first introduced the logs were
> public. I noticed Jayjg's mass over-sighting of seemingly harmless
> edits like spelling corrections with an summary of "pi". I brought the
> issue up with Brion, who thought it looked odd so he temporally
> removed oversight from Jayjg.  [23]. Arbcom looked at the issue, and
> apparently decided that it was all okay. Jay's access was restored,
> the revisions stayed oversighted, and he continued mass over-sighting
> old edits like these. I trusted then. Having seen the evidence I think
> it would be unwise to extend the same trust again. --Gmaxwell 03:03,
> 25 August 2007 (UTC)"
>
> "Although Sarah's actions are old enough to be uninteresting, as Dan
> pointed out above, the possible appearance of coverup is very
> interesting and important and should be fully resolved." (Gmaxwell)
>
> Thatcher131: "Overly aggressive use of oversight by Jayjg was brought
> up privately as an issue when oversight was first instituted, but the
> concerns were apparently dismissed. This should be looked into again."
>
> Jayjg really needs to explain himself but he has evidently decided to
> abandon wikipedia, at least for the period of the ArbCom case against
> him. Apart from an initial post opposing the ArbComm taking on the
> case he has made no contribution to the ArbComm case, not to the
> Workshop or Evidence page. In the past admins who have failed to
> participate in an ArbComm case involving them have been desysopped.
>
> Given Jayjg's unexplained absence, his failure to respond to one
> ArbCom case against him, the serious questions that exist considering
> his use of Oversight in another matter and the possibility that an
> account that has quite a number of tools attached has been abandoned
> and may be usurped by a hacker I'm wondering whether anything will be
> done? Will Jayjg be desysopped and have his tools removed (and be
> unsubscribed from ArbComm-L) at least as a precaution until he returns
> and explains himself? Will he be deemed to have abdicated his
> responsibilities by refusing to respond to an ArbComm case against him
> and refusing to explain the Oversight situation?
>
> At the very least Jimbo should direct the ArbComm to examine Jay's
> possible abuse of his Oversight tools and investigate other possible
> abuses.  The dereliction of duty by a senior admin is a serious
> problem which should not be swept under the carpet or overlooked.
> Doing so only further damages Wikipedia's credibility in a year in
> which we have taken a number of serious blows.
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is not AWOL

Jimmy Wales
In reply to this post by Frank Bellowes
Let me nip this in the bud.

Frank Bellowes wrote:
> At the very least Jimbo should direct the ArbComm to examine Jay's
> possible abuse of his Oversight tools and investigate other possible
> abuses.  The dereliction of duty by a senior admin is a serious
> problem which should not be swept under the carpet or overlooked.
> Doing so only further damages Wikipedia's credibility in a year in
> which we have taken a number of serious blows.

This entire email was ludicrous, frankly.

Jayjg (and SlimVirgin) have both been responsive and participating in
the discussion about this.

If people wonder why we do some discussions like this privately, Frank's
email is a good example of why... trolling.


--Jimbo

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is AWOL

Jimmy Wales
In reply to this post by NavouWiki
NavouWiki wrote:
> He does not have to explain his absence.

The claimed "absence" is a lie.

--Jimbo


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is AWOL

Nick-136
In reply to this post by Frank Bellowes
> Unlike Urthogie, Jayjg is a trusted user and admin who has access to
> tools such as Oversight and Checkuser and is also on the ArbComm
> mailing list as a former member of that body. He's well aware of the
> custom of announcing when you are on "Wikibreak" or "Wikiholiday" but
> has not posted any such announcement.


That's a cause for some concern, not annoyance, but genuine concern. Can
anybody confirm everything is OK with Jayjg, is he busy, unable to access
the internet or is he genuinely trying to avoid questions of the use of the
tools he has been given access too. Until we have some more of an idea as to
why Jayjg is not editing, we really should put this case on 'ice' - not
brushing it under the carpet, but waiting until one party is available to
defend themselves.
--
Nick
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nick
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is AWOL

Steven Walling
In reply to this post by Jimmy Wales
Um, his contrib
histor<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%253AContributions&contribs=user&target=Jayjg&namespace=&year=&month=-1>y
doesn't show anything since the 4th. That doesn't look to be a lie to me.
Please elaborate.

On 8/27/07, Jimmy Wales <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> NavouWiki wrote:
> > He does not have to explain his absence.
>
> The claimed "absence" is a lie.
>
> --Jimbo
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is AWOL

Matthew Brown-5
Jay has been communicative in email with Jimbo and members of the arbcom.

-Matt

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is AWOL

Frank Bellowes
In reply to this post by Jimmy Wales
On 8/27/07, Jimmy Wales <[hidden email]> wrote:
> NavouWiki wrote:
> > He does not have to explain his absence.
>
> The claimed "absence" is a lie.
>
> --Jimbo
>

The claimed "absence" is a fact. He hasn't made any edits since August
4th and has made no statement explaining his absence. He disappeared
in conjunction with an RFA case in which he's named as a party.

This behaviour is very irresponsible for a "trusted admin" let alone
one with various entitlements on the project.

It is reasonable to expect a modicum of accountability and
transparency. That the ArbComm is discussing this behind closed doors,
without any sort of mechanism for feedback by users or any sort of
transparency does not enhance the credibility of the project,
particularly at a time when it has come under severe criticism that
has eroded our standing.

Frank

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is AWOL

Frank Bellowes
In reply to this post by Kirill Lokshin
On 8/27/07, Kirill Lokshin <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 8/27/07, Frank Bellowes <[hidden email]> wrote:
> [snip various comments about oversight, etc.]
>
> Well, as we said on AN/I when this first came up, "the Arbitration
> Committee is discussing the issues involved".
>
> Kirill

And when can we expect some sort of update on the situation or details
about what is going on?

Frank

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is AWOL

David Gerard-2
On 27/08/07, Frank Bellowes <[hidden email]> wrote:

> And when can we expect some sort of update on the situation or details
> about what is going on?


Probably never by being a cock about it, as here.


- d.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is AWOL

Frank Bellowes
In reply to this post by Matthew Brown-5
On 8/27/07, Matthew Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Jay has been communicative in email with Jimbo and members of the arbcom.
>
> -Matt

Don't members of the project deserve some sort of explanation,
particularly when he is under scrutiny in one ArbComm case and on ANI?

If there is no transparency then there is no ability for other admins
or users to respond (and possibly refute) whatever private
explanations Jayjg may have proffered for his actions. This is not how
an accountable, transparent project works.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is AWOL

Steven Walling
In reply to this post by Frank Bellowes
Oh come off it already with the conspiracy mongering. As you can plainly
read, he's been in email contact with the ArbCom and others. That wouldn't
be an out of the ordinary or banning offense at all. People do have a right
to privacy when it comes to matters such as these.

On 8/27/07, Frank Bellowes <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 8/27/07, Kirill Lokshin <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On 8/27/07, Frank Bellowes <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > [snip various comments about oversight, etc.]
> >
> > Well, as we said on AN/I when this first came up, "the Arbitration
> > Committee is discussing the issues involved".
> >
> > Kirill
>
> And when can we expect some sort of update on the situation or details
> about what is going on?
>
> Frank
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is AWOL

John Lee-14
In reply to this post by Frank Bellowes
On 8/28/07, Frank Bellowes <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 8/27/07, Jimmy Wales <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > NavouWiki wrote:
> > > He does not have to explain his absence.
> >
> > The claimed "absence" is a lie.
> >
> > --Jimbo
> >
>
> The claimed "absence" is a fact. He hasn't made any edits since August
> 4th and has made no statement explaining his absence. He disappeared
> in conjunction with an RFA case in which he's named as a party.
>
> This behaviour is very irresponsible for a "trusted admin" let alone
> one with various entitlements on the project.
>
> It is reasonable to expect a modicum of accountability and
> transparency. That the ArbComm is discussing this behind closed doors,
> without any sort of mechanism for feedback by users or any sort of
> transparency does not enhance the credibility of the project,
> particularly at a time when it has come under severe criticism that
> has eroded our standing.


I'm not fond of opaqueness, but how is this different from standard
operating procedure? I haven't been an active clerk in ages, but I have
never heard of a change to the policy that hearings and discussions between
parties and arbitrators can be conducted in private, via email. Recall that
even evidence can be submitted by email.

Johnleemk
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is not AWOL

Frank Bellowes
In reply to this post by Jimmy Wales
Jimbo, the day that demands for accountability become "trolling" is
the day Wikipedia ceases to be a project with some sort of social good
in mind and becomes a private club. I don't think that's what most
Wikipedians signed on to.

Please do not label legitimate questions "trolling" just because you
seem to prefer private accommodation to public responsibility.

On 8/27/07, Jimmy Wales <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Let me nip this in the bud.
>
> Frank Bellowes wrote:
> > At the very least Jimbo should direct the ArbComm to examine Jay's
> > possible abuse of his Oversight tools and investigate other possible
> > abuses.  The dereliction of duty by a senior admin is a serious
> > problem which should not be swept under the carpet or overlooked.
> > Doing so only further damages Wikipedia's credibility in a year in
> > which we have taken a number of serious blows.
>
> This entire email was ludicrous, frankly.
>
> Jayjg (and SlimVirgin) have both been responsive and participating in
> the discussion about this.
>
> If people wonder why we do some discussions like this privately, Frank's
> email is a good example of why... trolling.
>
>
> --Jimbo
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is AWOL

David Gerard-2
In reply to this post by Frank Bellowes
On 27/08/07, Frank Bellowes <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Don't members of the project deserve some sort of explanation,
> particularly when he is under scrutiny in one ArbComm case and on ANI?


Go away, you trolling fuckwit.


- d.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is AWOL

Jimmy Wales
In reply to this post by Steven Walling
Steven Walling wrote:
> Um, his contrib
> histor<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%253AContributions&contribs=user&target=Jayjg&namespace=&year=&month=-1>y
> doesn't show anything since the 4th. That doesn't look to be a lie to me.
> Please elaborate.

He's been fully and completely responsive and participating in the email
discussion.

Why is he not on-wiki?  Beats me, but so what?

It's pure trolling.

--Jimbo

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is AWOL

Jimmy Wales
In reply to this post by Frank Bellowes
Frank Bellowes wrote:
> On 8/27/07, Matthew Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Jay has been communicative in email with Jimbo and members of the arbcom.
>>
>> -Matt
>
> Don't members of the project deserve some sort of explanation,
> particularly when he is under scrutiny in one ArbComm case and on ANI?

When there is something to explain, we will explain it.  Jeez.

> If there is no transparency then there is no ability for other admins
> or users to respond (and possibly refute) whatever private
> explanations Jayjg may have proffered for his actions. This is not how
> an accountable, transparent project works.

Stop trolling.  Good grief.  We are having a private discussion.

--Jimbo

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jayjg is not AWOL

Steven Walling
In reply to this post by Frank Bellowes
Trolling is trying to stir shit up, accusing the ArbCom and Jimbo with not
dealing with the issue...and then, when they say they are dealing with it,
still grinding your axe. Just have some patience and wait. It's vastly
premature to be crying "cover up" and "cabal" when the hearing isn't even
closed yet.

On 8/27/07, Frank Bellowes <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Jimbo, the day that demands for accountability become "trolling" is
> the day Wikipedia ceases to be a project with some sort of social good
> in mind and becomes a private club. I don't think that's what most
> Wikipedians signed on to.
>
> Please do not label legitimate questions "trolling" just because you
> seem to prefer private accommodation to public responsibility.
>
> On 8/27/07, Jimmy Wales <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Let me nip this in the bud.
> >
> > Frank Bellowes wrote:
> > > At the very least Jimbo should direct the ArbComm to examine Jay's
> > > possible abuse of his Oversight tools and investigate other possible
> > > abuses.  The dereliction of duty by a senior admin is a serious
> > > problem which should not be swept under the carpet or overlooked.
> > > Doing so only further damages Wikipedia's credibility in a year in
> > > which we have taken a number of serious blows.
> >
> > This entire email was ludicrous, frankly.
> >
> > Jayjg (and SlimVirgin) have both been responsive and participating in
> > the discussion about this.
> >
> > If people wonder why we do some discussions like this privately, Frank's
> > email is a good example of why... trolling.
> >
> >
> > --Jimbo
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
1234 ... 7