[Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
196 messages Options
1 ... 345678910
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Pine W
I think that I understand the GamerGate reference. A decentralized swarm of
harassment can be a major problem, and in this case I am concerned (I
haven't attempted to review the evidence) that at least one person is being
hounded off-wiki regarding their alleged involvement in this matter in a
way that would receive a firm response by ENWP administrators if the same
hounding was happening on ENWP.

Fear of being hounded can discourage people from reporting problems.

On English Wikipedia we have some administrators who are willing to make
politically difficult blocks, and we have an arbitration committee that has
been willing to review alleged misconduct by high profile people including
administrators, but I'm not sure that all wikis have a sufficient number of
competent and good faith administrators to address allegations of
misconduct, especially misconduct by people who have relatively high levels
of local political support.

Even more challenging to moderate are off-wiki activities in places which
do not honor ENWP norms. I do not know of a robust solution to this
problem, and my guess is that there is no robust solution unless we want
governments to have more ability to proactively filter and to suppress
Internet content that does not meet with their approval.

I think that ENWP is more like a busy, diverse, and loud public square than
a quiet office with tight control of what everyone does and a central
authority that quickly gets rid of people who make statements that are not
acceptable within narrow parameters. I worry that the concept of "safe
spaces" may come to mean something like: "People are only allowed to
participate on Wikimedia sites if they act according to WMF's opinions
regarding politically correct behavior and create content that does not
offend WMF". Political correctness and safety are not characteristics that
I would associate with Wikimedia sites, for better and for worse, and I
think that attempting to create more political correctness and safety can
come at too much expense of honesty, due process, freedom of expression,
and editorial independence. As mentioned by others, WMF’s recent power grab
calls into question the editorial independence of the Wikimedia communities.

This does not mean that I would give a free pass to Fram or that I am OK
with someone hounding a person who makes a complaint, whether on wiki or
off wiki.

I think that a good conversation for the ENWP community to have would be
regarding how we can increase confidence by victims of harassment in the
integrity of ENWP's investigation and enforcement systems. Courage is
sometimes necessary to speak up in public, as many of us are doing in this
thread and on wiki with various degrees of personal risk. I am concerned
about community members possibly deciding not to report problems because
they lack confidence that their reports will be taken seriously by ENWP's
community authorities and lack confidence that they will be protected from
further harm to the extent that the ENWP community can protect them.
(Protecting people from off wiki hounding is, unfortunately, probably
impossible if aggressors are determined to hound someone.)

I have concerns regarding a system for anonymous complaints because I
generally support transparent enforcement and due process. However, if
victims are not reporting problems due to fear and if there is a way that
we can provide due process protections for the accused while increasing the
confidence of victims in ENWP's investigations and enforcement systems then
I think that we should consider making modifications. This does not require
any involvement from WMF, although we might want to ask WMF for technical
support if needed for a system that we design or agree to implement.
Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )

P.S. I need to stop posting in this thread so that I do not exceed my limit
of Wikimedia-l posts for the month, but my silence does not indicate lack
of interest.




On Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 16:24 Paulo Santos Perneta <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> No idea what could be the relation with GamerGate and the current issue
> onwiki at wiki en. Would you care to elaborate?
>
> Paulo
>
> A quinta, 13 de jun de 2019, 19:53, David Gerard <[hidden email]>
> escreveu:
>
> > I think the problem is that the pathological people, having been
> > called out on being pathological, decided to double down on the
> > original complainant. See also: Gamergate, a clearly apt and apposite
> > comparison.
> >
> > On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 19:48, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm sad to hear that. I would not want a victim to go with a request
> for
> > > help to WMF, local functionaries, an arbitration committee, or anyone
> > else,
> > > and have the situation end up worse rather than better. I don't know
> what
> > > to recommend. Perhaps you could ask the stewards what they think.
> > >
> > > I am also sad to hear about the difficulties regarding the situation in
> > > which you think that someone was at risk of self-harm. I think that the
> > > situation you described is probably appropriate for review by the
> > > management of WMF Trust and Safety so that they can take a second
> look. I
> > > encourage you to contact them.
> > >
> > > I am finding this conversation to be rather depressing, but I am glad
> > that
> > > we are having it, because this is one way of developing solutions.
> > >
> > > Pine
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Isaac Olatunde
I have seen a known user attacking me on one of Wikipedia's criticism site
during my ArbCom case on the English Wikipedia but when it was report, they
said there is nothing they can do about off-wiki attacks/harassment. That
event alone gives me an impression that the English Wikipedia community
cannot protect anyone from off-wiki harassment. Why would people feel
comfortable to report a case of harassment to a community or group that can
not protect them?

Isaac

On Fri, Jun 14, 2019, 8:33 AM Pine W <[hidden email] wrote:

> I think that I understand the GamerGate reference. A decentralized swarm of
> harassment can be a major problem, and in this case I am concerned (I
> haven't attempted to review the evidence) that at least one person is being
> hounded off-wiki regarding their alleged involvement in this matter in a
> way that would receive a firm response by ENWP administrators if the same
> hounding was happening on ENWP.
>
> Fear of being hounded can discourage people from reporting problems.
>
> On English Wikipedia we have some administrators who are willing to make
> politically difficult blocks, and we have an arbitration committee that has
> been willing to review alleged misconduct by high profile people including
> administrators, but I'm not sure that all wikis have a sufficient number of
> competent and good faith administrators to address allegations of
> misconduct, especially misconduct by people who have relatively high levels
> of local political support.
>
> Even more challenging to moderate are off-wiki activities in places which
> do not honor ENWP norms. I do not know of a robust solution to this
> problem, and my guess is that there is no robust solution unless we want
> governments to have more ability to proactively filter and to suppress
> Internet content that does not meet with their approval.
>
> I think that ENWP is more like a busy, diverse, and loud public square than
> a quiet office with tight control of what everyone does and a central
> authority that quickly gets rid of people who make statements that are not
> acceptable within narrow parameters. I worry that the concept of "safe
> spaces" may come to mean something like: "People are only allowed to
> participate on Wikimedia sites if they act according to WMF's opinions
> regarding politically correct behavior and create content that does not
> offend WMF". Political correctness and safety are not characteristics that
> I would associate with Wikimedia sites, for better and for worse, and I
> think that attempting to create more political correctness and safety can
> come at too much expense of honesty, due process, freedom of expression,
> and editorial independence. As mentioned by others, WMF’s recent power grab
> calls into question the editorial independence of the Wikimedia
> communities.
>
> This does not mean that I would give a free pass to Fram or that I am OK
> with someone hounding a person who makes a complaint, whether on wiki or
> off wiki.
>
> I think that a good conversation for the ENWP community to have would be
> regarding how we can increase confidence by victims of harassment in the
> integrity of ENWP's investigation and enforcement systems. Courage is
> sometimes necessary to speak up in public, as many of us are doing in this
> thread and on wiki with various degrees of personal risk. I am concerned
> about community members possibly deciding not to report problems because
> they lack confidence that their reports will be taken seriously by ENWP's
> community authorities and lack confidence that they will be protected from
> further harm to the extent that the ENWP community can protect them.
> (Protecting people from off wiki hounding is, unfortunately, probably
> impossible if aggressors are determined to hound someone.)
>
> I have concerns regarding a system for anonymous complaints because I
> generally support transparent enforcement and due process. However, if
> victims are not reporting problems due to fear and if there is a way that
> we can provide due process protections for the accused while increasing the
> confidence of victims in ENWP's investigations and enforcement systems then
> I think that we should consider making modifications. This does not require
> any involvement from WMF, although we might want to ask WMF for technical
> support if needed for a system that we design or agree to implement.
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>
> P.S. I need to stop posting in this thread so that I do not exceed my limit
> of Wikimedia-l posts for the month, but my silence does not indicate lack
> of interest.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 16:24 Paulo Santos Perneta <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > No idea what could be the relation with GamerGate and the current issue
> > onwiki at wiki en. Would you care to elaborate?
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > A quinta, 13 de jun de 2019, 19:53, David Gerard <[hidden email]>
> > escreveu:
> >
> > > I think the problem is that the pathological people, having been
> > > called out on being pathological, decided to double down on the
> > > original complainant. See also: Gamergate, a clearly apt and apposite
> > > comparison.
> > >
> > > On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 19:48, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm sad to hear that. I would not want a victim to go with a request
> > for
> > > > help to WMF, local functionaries, an arbitration committee, or anyone
> > > else,
> > > > and have the situation end up worse rather than better. I don't know
> > what
> > > > to recommend. Perhaps you could ask the stewards what they think.
> > > >
> > > > I am also sad to hear about the difficulties regarding the situation
> in
> > > > which you think that someone was at risk of self-harm. I think that
> the
> > > > situation you described is probably appropriate for review by the
> > > > management of WMF Trust and Safety so that they can take a second
> > look. I
> > > > encourage you to contact them.
> > > >
> > > > I am finding this conversation to be rather depressing, but I am glad
> > > that
> > > > we are having it, because this is one way of developing solutions.
> > > >
> > > > Pine
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Paulo Santos Perneta
In reply to this post by Pine W
I've not been on those dumping grounds, open air sewages and troll hives
were that stuff is said to be happening, and only know that from Fae and
Raystorm accounts. What is going on at those places possibly is the same as
what happened with GamerGate, I've not confirmed, and frankly I'm not
interested in the least in going to such troll dens. What I fail to
understand is what's the point of the chair of the BoT dropping into an
already very much escalated discussion, first stating she's not part of
that community, then that she is not interested in their current situation,
and would not take part on addressing that issue even if she had not been
involved in it. And then proceeding to lecture the onwiki community, the
vast majority of which is not involved in that offwiki stuff and not even
aware of it, dismissing the whole case about editorial independence of
Wikipedia as a sexist mob doing GamerGate stuff. It only made everything
worse than what already was.

Best,
Paulo





Pine W <[hidden email]> escreveu no dia sexta, 14/06/2019 à(s) 08:33:

> I think that I understand the GamerGate reference. A decentralized swarm of
> harassment can be a major problem, and in this case I am concerned (I
> haven't attempted to review the evidence) that at least one person is being
> hounded off-wiki regarding their alleged involvement in this matter in a
> way that would receive a firm response by ENWP administrators if the same
> hounding was happening on ENWP.
>
> Fear of being hounded can discourage people from reporting problems.
>
> On English Wikipedia we have some administrators who are willing to make
> politically difficult blocks, and we have an arbitration committee that has
> been willing to review alleged misconduct by high profile people including
> administrators, but I'm not sure that all wikis have a sufficient number of
> competent and good faith administrators to address allegations of
> misconduct, especially misconduct by people who have relatively high levels
> of local political support.
>
> Even more challenging to moderate are off-wiki activities in places which
> do not honor ENWP norms. I do not know of a robust solution to this
> problem, and my guess is that there is no robust solution unless we want
> governments to have more ability to proactively filter and to suppress
> Internet content that does not meet with their approval.
>
> I think that ENWP is more like a busy, diverse, and loud public square than
> a quiet office with tight control of what everyone does and a central
> authority that quickly gets rid of people who make statements that are not
> acceptable within narrow parameters. I worry that the concept of "safe
> spaces" may come to mean something like: "People are only allowed to
> participate on Wikimedia sites if they act according to WMF's opinions
> regarding politically correct behavior and create content that does not
> offend WMF". Political correctness and safety are not characteristics that
> I would associate with Wikimedia sites, for better and for worse, and I
> think that attempting to create more political correctness and safety can
> come at too much expense of honesty, due process, freedom of expression,
> and editorial independence. As mentioned by others, WMF’s recent power grab
> calls into question the editorial independence of the Wikimedia
> communities.
>
> This does not mean that I would give a free pass to Fram or that I am OK
> with someone hounding a person who makes a complaint, whether on wiki or
> off wiki.
>
> I think that a good conversation for the ENWP community to have would be
> regarding how we can increase confidence by victims of harassment in the
> integrity of ENWP's investigation and enforcement systems. Courage is
> sometimes necessary to speak up in public, as many of us are doing in this
> thread and on wiki with various degrees of personal risk. I am concerned
> about community members possibly deciding not to report problems because
> they lack confidence that their reports will be taken seriously by ENWP's
> community authorities and lack confidence that they will be protected from
> further harm to the extent that the ENWP community can protect them.
> (Protecting people from off wiki hounding is, unfortunately, probably
> impossible if aggressors are determined to hound someone.)
>
> I have concerns regarding a system for anonymous complaints because I
> generally support transparent enforcement and due process. However, if
> victims are not reporting problems due to fear and if there is a way that
> we can provide due process protections for the accused while increasing the
> confidence of victims in ENWP's investigations and enforcement systems then
> I think that we should consider making modifications. This does not require
> any involvement from WMF, although we might want to ask WMF for technical
> support if needed for a system that we design or agree to implement.
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>
> P.S. I need to stop posting in this thread so that I do not exceed my limit
> of Wikimedia-l posts for the month, but my silence does not indicate lack
> of interest.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 16:24 Paulo Santos Perneta <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > No idea what could be the relation with GamerGate and the current issue
> > onwiki at wiki en. Would you care to elaborate?
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > A quinta, 13 de jun de 2019, 19:53, David Gerard <[hidden email]>
> > escreveu:
> >
> > > I think the problem is that the pathological people, having been
> > > called out on being pathological, decided to double down on the
> > > original complainant. See also: Gamergate, a clearly apt and apposite
> > > comparison.
> > >
> > > On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 19:48, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm sad to hear that. I would not want a victim to go with a request
> > for
> > > > help to WMF, local functionaries, an arbitration committee, or anyone
> > > else,
> > > > and have the situation end up worse rather than better. I don't know
> > what
> > > > to recommend. Perhaps you could ask the stewards what they think.
> > > >
> > > > I am also sad to hear about the difficulties regarding the situation
> in
> > > > which you think that someone was at risk of self-harm. I think that
> the
> > > > situation you described is probably appropriate for review by the
> > > > management of WMF Trust and Safety so that they can take a second
> > look. I
> > > > encourage you to contact them.
> > > >
> > > > I am finding this conversation to be rather depressing, but I am glad
> > > that
> > > > we are having it, because this is one way of developing solutions.
> > > >
> > > > Pine
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Todd Allen
In reply to this post by Robert Fernandez
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 <[hidden email]>
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 <[hidden email]> 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
> > --
> > [hidden email] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> >
> > On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 15:35, John Erling Blad <[hidden email]> 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

David Gerard-2
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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>
> 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 <[hidden email]> 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
> > > --
> > > [hidden email] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> > >
> > > On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 15:35, John Erling Blad <[hidden email]> 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: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Paulo Santos Perneta
At this point, it certainly looks like that. That, and the "f*** Arbcom"
thing. If you know otherwise, please explain.

Paulo

David Gerard <[hidden email]> escreveu no dia sexta, 14/06/2019 à(s)
11:37:

> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <
> [hidden email]>
> > 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 <[hidden email]> 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
> > > > --
> > > > [hidden email] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 15:35, John Erling Blad <[hidden email]>
> 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

camelia boban
In reply to this post by Mister Thrapostibongles
I quote David and Isaac.
Harassment is a serious thing and hounding another user is out of any wiki
behavior.
Before asking why WMF has banned an admin (and if Fram was not an admin,
all these discussions would not have been done), we need to ask ourselves
why we (other users) have allowed such an attitude without intervening to
stop it.


Camelia


--
*Camelia Boban*

*| Java EE Developer |*

*Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia *Foundation
Coordinator - Diversity Working Group for Wikimedia Strategy 2030
Chair & co-founder - WikiDonne User Group *| WikiDonne Project ideator*

*Diversity Space @ Wikimania 2019 Co-Lead*
WMIT - WMSE - WMCH - WMAR Member

M. +39 3383385545
[hidden email]
*Aissa Technologies* <http://aissatechnologies.eu/>* | *Twitter
<https://twitter.com/cameliaboban> *|* *LinkedIn
<https://www.linkedin.com/in/camelia-boban-31319122>*
*Wikipedia <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Camelia.boban> **| **WikiDonne
UG <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiDonne>* | *WikiDonne Project
<https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progetto:WikiDonne> *











Il giorno ven 14 giu 2019 alle ore 14:32 Mister Thrapostibongles <
[hidden email]> ha scritto:

> Fæ
>
> [...] the pre-existing understanding that the WMF do not replace
> > existing and perfectly adequate community agreed procedures for
> > banning bad behaviour on our projects.
>
>
> Unfortunately, there is ample evidence that the existing English Wikipedia
> community processes are not "perfectly adequate" for that purpose.
>
>
> > If the English
> > Wikipedia's policies are not fit for purpose, or implementation of
> > policy is incompetent, we need a much bigger discussion
>
>
> Indeed.  Unfortunately the tone of the discussion here and at
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community_response_to_the_Wikimedia_Foundation%27s_ban_of_Fram
> suggests
> that the requisite discussion is now less, not more, likely to happen or be
> productive.
>
> Thrapostibongles
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Fæ
In reply to this post by Isaac Olatunde
WMF T&S will not do anything about off-wiki harassment either, apart
from banning on-wiki users or offering to block your account as the
target of harassment.

There's a lot that can be improved around harassment and civility, but
honestly, the WMF has no special answers or powers, they do not claim
to be experts. As someone who has had blackmail and death threats,
advice from the WMF was a lot worse than advice I had from the either
the police or victim support.

Though my experience is mostly dated, the WMF gave me bad advice which
significantly delayed me from contacting the police, and I cannot
recommend that a target of harassment put their faith in the WMF if
they are targeted with harassment. The only reason I reported some
nasty transphobic threats targeting me earlier this year was to ensure
that the WMF had them logged, in case there was a wider pattern of
abuse against other LGBT+ Wikipedians. WMF T&S have given me no useful
feedback or updates on my own case in the months since.

I am very sorry to say this so bluntly, but from personal experience
though WMF senior management write a lot of nice soft words about
harassment and safe spaces, in practice a user being targeted is
better off having private chats on IRC with volunteer stewards and
checkusers that they trust, rather than WMF employees.

P.S. I encourage the use of the words "target of harassment". Being
labelled as a "victim" which puts the focus on you just because you
made a complaint, rather than the troll harassing others, is not
helpful.

Thanks,
Fae

On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 13:29, Isaac Olatunde <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I have seen a known user attacking me on one of Wikipedia's criticism site
> during my ArbCom case on the English Wikipedia but when it was report, they
> said there is nothing they can do about off-wiki attacks/harassment. That
> event alone gives me an impression that the English Wikipedia community
> cannot protect anyone from off-wiki harassment. Why would people feel
> comfortable to report a case of harassment to a community or group that can
> not protect them?
>
> Isaac
>
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019, 8:33 AM Pine W <[hidden email] wrote:
>
> > I think that I understand the GamerGate reference. A decentralized swarm of
> > harassment can be a major problem, and in this case I am concerned (I
> > haven't attempted to review the evidence) that at least one person is being
> > hounded off-wiki regarding their alleged involvement in this matter in a
> > way that would receive a firm response by ENWP administrators if the same
> > hounding was happening on ENWP.
> >
> > Fear of being hounded can discourage people from reporting problems.
> >
> > On English Wikipedia we have some administrators who are willing to make
> > politically difficult blocks, and we have an arbitration committee that has
> > been willing to review alleged misconduct by high profile people including
> > administrators, but I'm not sure that all wikis have a sufficient number of
> > competent and good faith administrators to address allegations of
> > misconduct, especially misconduct by people who have relatively high levels
> > of local political support.
> >
> > Even more challenging to moderate are off-wiki activities in places which
> > do not honor ENWP norms. I do not know of a robust solution to this
> > problem, and my guess is that there is no robust solution unless we want
> > governments to have more ability to proactively filter and to suppress
> > Internet content that does not meet with their approval.
> >
> > I think that ENWP is more like a busy, diverse, and loud public square than
> > a quiet office with tight control of what everyone does and a central
> > authority that quickly gets rid of people who make statements that are not
> > acceptable within narrow parameters. I worry that the concept of "safe
> > spaces" may come to mean something like: "People are only allowed to
> > participate on Wikimedia sites if they act according to WMF's opinions
> > regarding politically correct behavior and create content that does not
> > offend WMF". Political correctness and safety are not characteristics that
> > I would associate with Wikimedia sites, for better and for worse, and I
> > think that attempting to create more political correctness and safety can
> > come at too much expense of honesty, due process, freedom of expression,
> > and editorial independence. As mentioned by others, WMF’s recent power grab
> > calls into question the editorial independence of the Wikimedia
> > communities.
> >
> > This does not mean that I would give a free pass to Fram or that I am OK
> > with someone hounding a person who makes a complaint, whether on wiki or
> > off wiki.
> >
> > I think that a good conversation for the ENWP community to have would be
> > regarding how we can increase confidence by victims of harassment in the
> > integrity of ENWP's investigation and enforcement systems. Courage is
> > sometimes necessary to speak up in public, as many of us are doing in this
> > thread and on wiki with various degrees of personal risk. I am concerned
> > about community members possibly deciding not to report problems because
> > they lack confidence that their reports will be taken seriously by ENWP's
> > community authorities and lack confidence that they will be protected from
> > further harm to the extent that the ENWP community can protect them.
> > (Protecting people from off wiki hounding is, unfortunately, probably
> > impossible if aggressors are determined to hound someone.)
> >
> > I have concerns regarding a system for anonymous complaints because I
> > generally support transparent enforcement and due process. However, if
> > victims are not reporting problems due to fear and if there is a way that
> > we can provide due process protections for the accused while increasing the
> > confidence of victims in ENWP's investigations and enforcement systems then
> > I think that we should consider making modifications. This does not require
> > any involvement from WMF, although we might want to ask WMF for technical
> > support if needed for a system that we design or agree to implement.
> > Pine
> > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> >
> > P.S. I need to stop posting in this thread so that I do not exceed my limit
> > of Wikimedia-l posts for the month, but my silence does not indicate lack
> > of interest.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 16:24 Paulo Santos Perneta <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > No idea what could be the relation with GamerGate and the current issue
> > > onwiki at wiki en. Would you care to elaborate?
> > >
> > > Paulo
> > >
> > > A quinta, 13 de jun de 2019, 19:53, David Gerard <[hidden email]>
> > > escreveu:
> > >
> > > > I think the problem is that the pathological people, having been
> > > > called out on being pathological, decided to double down on the
> > > > original complainant. See also: Gamergate, a clearly apt and apposite
> > > > comparison.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 19:48, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm sad to hear that. I would not want a victim to go with a request
> > > for
> > > > > help to WMF, local functionaries, an arbitration committee, or anyone
> > > > else,
> > > > > and have the situation end up worse rather than better. I don't know
> > > what
> > > > > to recommend. Perhaps you could ask the stewards what they think.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am also sad to hear about the difficulties regarding the situation
> > in
> > > > > which you think that someone was at risk of self-harm. I think that
> > the
> > > > > situation you described is probably appropriate for review by the
> > > > > management of WMF Trust and Safety so that they can take a second
> > > look. I
> > > > > encourage you to contact them.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am finding this conversation to be rather depressing, but I am glad
> > > > that
> > > > > we are having it, because this is one way of developing solutions.
> > > > >
> > > > > Pine
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Isaac Olatunde
In reply to this post by camelia boban
Sadly, people with advanced permissions (admin, checkuser etc) on Wikimedia
projects are almost immune to sanctions. You could imagine a behavior that
would normally lead to a site ban for people with no permission will only
result in a desysop for an administrator. Worst of it is Wikimedia Commons
where there has to be two different RfC/votes to get an admin desysoped.

Isaac

On Fri, Jun 14, 2019, 1:46 PM camelia boban <[hidden email] wrote:

> I quote David and Isaac.
> Harassment is a serious thing and hounding another user is out of any wiki
> behavior.
> Before asking why WMF has banned an admin (and if Fram was not an admin,
> all these discussions would not have been done), we need to ask ourselves
> why we (other users) have allowed such an attitude without intervening to
> stop it.
>
>
> Camelia
>
>
> --
> *Camelia Boban*
>
> *| Java EE Developer |*
>
> *Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia *Foundation
> Coordinator - Diversity Working Group for Wikimedia Strategy 2030
> Chair & co-founder - WikiDonne User Group *| WikiDonne Project ideator*
>
> *Diversity Space @ Wikimania 2019 Co-Lead*
> WMIT - WMSE - WMCH - WMAR Member
>
> M. +39 3383385545
> [hidden email]
> *Aissa Technologies* <http://aissatechnologies.eu/>* | *Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/cameliaboban> *|* *LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/camelia-boban-31319122>*
> *Wikipedia <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Camelia.boban> **|
> **WikiDonne
> UG <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiDonne>* | *WikiDonne Project
> <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progetto:WikiDonne> *
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Il giorno ven 14 giu 2019 alle ore 14:32 Mister Thrapostibongles <
> [hidden email]> ha scritto:
>
> > Fæ
> >
> > [...] the pre-existing understanding that the WMF do not replace
> > > existing and perfectly adequate community agreed procedures for
> > > banning bad behaviour on our projects.
> >
> >
> > Unfortunately, there is ample evidence that the existing English
> Wikipedia
> > community processes are not "perfectly adequate" for that purpose.
> >
> >
> > > If the English
> > > Wikipedia's policies are not fit for purpose, or implementation of
> > > policy is incompetent, we need a much bigger discussion
> >
> >
> > Indeed.  Unfortunately the tone of the discussion here and at
> >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community_response_to_the_Wikimedia_Foundation%27s_ban_of_Fram
> > suggests
> > that the requisite discussion is now less, not more, likely to happen or
> be
> > productive.
> >
> > Thrapostibongles
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Martijn Hoekstra
In reply to this post by camelia boban
 if Fram was not an admin, all these discussions would not have been done)
[citation needed]




why we (other users) have allowed such an attitude without intervening to

> stop it.
>
>
> Camelia
>
>
> --
> *Camelia Boban*
>
> *| Java EE Developer |*
>
> *Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia *Foundation
> Coordinator - Diversity Working Group for Wikimedia Strategy 2030
> Chair & co-founder - WikiDonne User Group *| WikiDonne Project ideator*
>
> *Diversity Space @ Wikimania 2019 Co-Lead*
> WMIT - WMSE - WMCH - WMAR Member
>
> M. +39 3383385545
> [hidden email]
> *Aissa Technologies* <http://aissatechnologies.eu/>* | *Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/cameliaboban> *|* *LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/camelia-boban-31319122>*
> *Wikipedia <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Camelia.boban> **|
> **WikiDonne
> UG <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiDonne>* | *WikiDonne Project
> <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progetto:WikiDonne> *
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Il giorno ven 14 giu 2019 alle ore 14:32 Mister Thrapostibongles <
> [hidden email]> ha scritto:
>
> > Fæ
> >
> > [...] the pre-existing understanding that the WMF do not replace
> > > existing and perfectly adequate community agreed procedures for
> > > banning bad behaviour on our projects.
> >
> >
> > Unfortunately, there is ample evidence that the existing English
> Wikipedia
> > community processes are not "perfectly adequate" for that purpose.
> >
> >
> > > If the English
> > > Wikipedia's policies are not fit for purpose, or implementation of
> > > policy is incompetent, we need a much bigger discussion
> >
> >
> > Indeed.  Unfortunately the tone of the discussion here and at
> >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community_response_to_the_Wikimedia_Foundation%27s_ban_of_Fram
> > suggests
> > that the requisite discussion is now less, not more, likely to happen or
> be
> > productive.
> >
> > Thrapostibongles
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Anders Wennersten-2
In reply to this post by camelia boban
+1

We need to make a reality that Wikipedia workspace is without langauge
that intimidate users.

Anders

Den 2019-06-14 kl. 14:45, skrev camelia boban:

> I quote David and Isaac.
> Harassment is a serious thing and hounding another user is out of any wiki
> behavior.
> Before asking why WMF has banned an admin (and if Fram was not an admin,
> all these discussions would not have been done), we need to ask ourselves
> why we (other users) have allowed such an attitude without intervening to
> stop it.
>
>
> Camelia
>
>
> --
> *Camelia Boban*
>
> *| Java EE Developer |*
>
> *Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia *Foundation
> Coordinator - Diversity Working Group for Wikimedia Strategy 2030
> Chair & co-founder - WikiDonne User Group *| WikiDonne Project ideator*
>
> *Diversity Space @ Wikimania 2019 Co-Lead*
> WMIT - WMSE - WMCH - WMAR Member
>
> M. +39 3383385545
> [hidden email]
> *Aissa Technologies* <http://aissatechnologies.eu/>* | *Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/cameliaboban> *|* *LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/camelia-boban-31319122>*
> *Wikipedia <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Camelia.boban> **| **WikiDonne
> UG <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiDonne>* | *WikiDonne Project
> <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progetto:WikiDonne> *
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Il giorno ven 14 giu 2019 alle ore 14:32 Mister Thrapostibongles <
> [hidden email]> ha scritto:
>
>> Fæ
>>
>> [...] the pre-existing understanding that the WMF do not replace
>>> existing and perfectly adequate community agreed procedures for
>>> banning bad behaviour on our projects.
>>
>> Unfortunately, there is ample evidence that the existing English Wikipedia
>> community processes are not "perfectly adequate" for that purpose.
>>
>>
>>> If the English
>>> Wikipedia's policies are not fit for purpose, or implementation of
>>> policy is incompetent, we need a much bigger discussion
>>
>> Indeed.  Unfortunately the tone of the discussion here and at
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community_response_to_the_Wikimedia_Foundation%27s_ban_of_Fram
>> suggests
>> that the requisite discussion is now less, not more, likely to happen or be
>> productive.
>>
>> Thrapostibongles
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Isaac Olatunde
In reply to this post by Isaac Olatunde
I do think that people should be sanctioned for off-wiki harassment if the
harassment is a result of the on-wiki activities of the victim. It doesn't
matter if it was done on-wiki or off-wiki, if we can identify the harasser
and we are confident that their actions are motivated by onwiki activities
of the victim.

Regards

Isaac

On Fri, Jun 14, 2019, 2:03 PM Isaac Olatunde <[hidden email]
wrote:

> Sadly, people with advanced permissions (admin, checkuser etc) on
> Wikimedia projects are almost immune to sanctions. You could imagine a
> behavior that would normally lead to a site ban for people with no
> permission will only result in a desysop for an administrator. Worst of it
> is Wikimedia Commons where there has to be two different RfC/votes to get
> an admin desysoped.
>
> Isaac
>
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019, 1:46 PM camelia boban <[hidden email]
> wrote:
>
>> I quote David and Isaac.
>> Harassment is a serious thing and hounding another user is out of any wiki
>> behavior.
>> Before asking why WMF has banned an admin (and if Fram was not an admin,
>> all these discussions would not have been done), we need to ask ourselves
>> why we (other users) have allowed such an attitude without intervening to
>> stop it.
>>
>>
>> Camelia
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Camelia Boban*
>>
>> *| Java EE Developer |*
>>
>> *Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia *Foundation
>> Coordinator - Diversity Working Group for Wikimedia Strategy 2030
>> Chair & co-founder - WikiDonne User Group *| WikiDonne Project ideator*
>>
>> *Diversity Space @ Wikimania 2019 Co-Lead*
>> WMIT - WMSE - WMCH - WMAR Member
>>
>> M. +39 3383385545
>> [hidden email]
>> *Aissa Technologies* <http://aissatechnologies.eu/>* | *Twitter
>> <https://twitter.com/cameliaboban> *|* *LinkedIn
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/camelia-boban-31319122>*
>> *Wikipedia <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Camelia.boban> **|
>> **WikiDonne
>> UG <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiDonne>* | *WikiDonne Project
>> <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progetto:WikiDonne> *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Il giorno ven 14 giu 2019 alle ore 14:32 Mister Thrapostibongles <
>> [hidden email]> ha scritto:
>>
>> > Fæ
>> >
>> > [...] the pre-existing understanding that the WMF do not replace
>> > > existing and perfectly adequate community agreed procedures for
>> > > banning bad behaviour on our projects.
>> >
>> >
>> > Unfortunately, there is ample evidence that the existing English
>> Wikipedia
>> > community processes are not "perfectly adequate" for that purpose.
>> >
>> >
>> > > If the English
>> > > Wikipedia's policies are not fit for purpose, or implementation of
>> > > policy is incompetent, we need a much bigger discussion
>> >
>> >
>> > Indeed.  Unfortunately the tone of the discussion here and at
>> >
>> >
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community_response_to_the_Wikimedia_Foundation%27s_ban_of_Fram
>> > suggests
>> > that the requisite discussion is now less, not more, likely to happen
>> or be
>> > productive.
>> >
>> > Thrapostibongles
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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: [hidden email]
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Isaac Olatunde
In reply to this post by Martijn Hoekstra
if Fram was not an admin, all these discussions would not have been done)
[citation needed]

I don't think this is entirely incorrect. Chances are that people would not
notice or care if Fram was not an admin.

Isaac

On Fri, Jun 14, 2019, 2:05 PM Martijn Hoekstra <[hidden email]
wrote:

>  if Fram was not an admin, all these discussions would not have been done)
> [citation needed]
>
>
>
>
> why we (other users) have allowed such an attitude without intervening to
> > stop it.
> >
> >
> > Camelia
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Camelia Boban*
> >
> > *| Java EE Developer |*
> >
> > *Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia *Foundation
> > Coordinator - Diversity Working Group for Wikimedia Strategy 2030
> > Chair & co-founder - WikiDonne User Group *| WikiDonne Project ideator*
> >
> > *Diversity Space @ Wikimania 2019 Co-Lead*
> > WMIT - WMSE - WMCH - WMAR Member
> >
> > M. +39 3383385545
> > [hidden email]
> > *Aissa Technologies* <http://aissatechnologies.eu/>* | *Twitter
> > <https://twitter.com/cameliaboban> *|* *LinkedIn
> > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/camelia-boban-31319122>*
> > *Wikipedia <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Camelia.boban> **|
> > **WikiDonne
> > UG <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiDonne>* | *WikiDonne Project
> > <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progetto:WikiDonne> *
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Il giorno ven 14 giu 2019 alle ore 14:32 Mister Thrapostibongles <
> > [hidden email]> ha scritto:
> >
> > > Fæ
> > >
> > > [...] the pre-existing understanding that the WMF do not replace
> > > > existing and perfectly adequate community agreed procedures for
> > > > banning bad behaviour on our projects.
> > >
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, there is ample evidence that the existing English
> > Wikipedia
> > > community processes are not "perfectly adequate" for that purpose.
> > >
> > >
> > > > If the English
> > > > Wikipedia's policies are not fit for purpose, or implementation of
> > > > policy is incompetent, we need a much bigger discussion
> > >
> > >
> > > Indeed.  Unfortunately the tone of the discussion here and at
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community_response_to_the_Wikimedia_Foundation%27s_ban_of_Fram
> > > suggests
> > > that the requisite discussion is now less, not more, likely to happen
> or
> > be
> > > productive.
> > >
> > > Thrapostibongles
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Todd Allen
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <
> [hidden email]>
> > 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 <[hidden email]> 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
> > > > --
> > > > [hidden email] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 15:35, John Erling Blad <[hidden email]>
> 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Todd Allen
In reply to this post by camelia boban
"Before asking why WMF has banned an admin (and if Fram was not an admin,
all these discussions would not have been done), we need to ask ourselves
why we (other users) have allowed such an attitude without intervening to
stop it."

First, if Fram were a well-known editor but not an admin, yes, there
absolutely would be such a discussion. But as to why, the answer, very
simply, is that the English Wikipedia community values competence over
politeness, and probably always will. That is part of the culture of the
community, and the WMF has no right to override that.

Todd

On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 6:46 AM camelia boban <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> I quote David and Isaac.
> Harassment is a serious thing and hounding another user is out of any wiki
> behavior.
> Before asking why WMF has banned an admin (and if Fram was not an admin,
> all these discussions would not have been done), we need to ask ourselves
> why we (other users) have allowed such an attitude without intervening to
> stop it.
>
>
> Camelia
>
>
> --
> *Camelia Boban*
>
> *| Java EE Developer |*
>
> *Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia *Foundation
> Coordinator - Diversity Working Group for Wikimedia Strategy 2030
> Chair & co-founder - WikiDonne User Group *| WikiDonne Project ideator*
>
> *Diversity Space @ Wikimania 2019 Co-Lead*
> WMIT - WMSE - WMCH - WMAR Member
>
> M. +39 3383385545
> [hidden email]
> *Aissa Technologies* <http://aissatechnologies.eu/>* | *Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/cameliaboban> *|* *LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/camelia-boban-31319122>*
> *Wikipedia <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Camelia.boban> **|
> **WikiDonne
> UG <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiDonne>* | *WikiDonne Project
> <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progetto:WikiDonne> *
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Il giorno ven 14 giu 2019 alle ore 14:32 Mister Thrapostibongles <
> [hidden email]> ha scritto:
>
> > Fæ
> >
> > [...] the pre-existing understanding that the WMF do not replace
> > > existing and perfectly adequate community agreed procedures for
> > > banning bad behaviour on our projects.
> >
> >
> > Unfortunately, there is ample evidence that the existing English
> Wikipedia
> > community processes are not "perfectly adequate" for that purpose.
> >
> >
> > > If the English
> > > Wikipedia's policies are not fit for purpose, or implementation of
> > > policy is incompetent, we need a much bigger discussion
> >
> >
> > Indeed.  Unfortunately the tone of the discussion here and at
> >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community_response_to_the_Wikimedia_Foundation%27s_ban_of_Fram
> > suggests
> > that the requisite discussion is now less, not more, likely to happen or
> be
> > productive.
> >
> > Thrapostibongles
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Kirill Lokshin
That's overstating the community's position a bit, I think.  Despite the
occasional attempt to get rid of the civility policy, the community has
continued to support it -- at least in the abstract -- and generally has no
problem whatsoever in sanctioning an ordinary, run-of-the-mill editor for
being uncivil, even when that editor is perfectly competent.

Rather, the problem occurs when a *popular* competent editor violates the
civility policy (or, for particularly popular editors, virtually any other
policy); the traditional consensus-based approach to policy enforcement
makes it difficult, if not impossible, to effectively sanction an editor
with a substantial contingent of vocal supporters who will argue against
any such sanctions whenever the opportunity arises.

Kirill

On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 1:58 PM Todd Allen <[hidden email]> wrote:

> "Before asking why WMF has banned an admin (and if Fram was not an admin,
> all these discussions would not have been done), we need to ask ourselves
> why we (other users) have allowed such an attitude without intervening to
> stop it."
>
> First, if Fram were a well-known editor but not an admin, yes, there
> absolutely would be such a discussion. But as to why, the answer, very
> simply, is that the English Wikipedia community values competence over
> politeness, and probably always will. That is part of the culture of the
> community, and the WMF has no right to override that.
>
> Todd
>
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 6:46 AM camelia boban <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > I quote David and Isaac.
> > Harassment is a serious thing and hounding another user is out of any
> wiki
> > behavior.
> > Before asking why WMF has banned an admin (and if Fram was not an admin,
> > all these discussions would not have been done), we need to ask ourselves
> > why we (other users) have allowed such an attitude without intervening to
> > stop it.
> >
> >
> > Camelia
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Camelia Boban*
> >
> > *| Java EE Developer |*
> >
> > *Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia *Foundation
> > Coordinator - Diversity Working Group for Wikimedia Strategy 2030
> > Chair & co-founder - WikiDonne User Group *| WikiDonne Project ideator*
> >
> > *Diversity Space @ Wikimania 2019 Co-Lead*
> > WMIT - WMSE - WMCH - WMAR Member
> >
> > M. +39 3383385545
> > [hidden email]
> > *Aissa Technologies* <http://aissatechnologies.eu/>* | *Twitter
> > <https://twitter.com/cameliaboban> *|* *LinkedIn
> > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/camelia-boban-31319122>*
> > *Wikipedia <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Camelia.boban> **|
> > **WikiDonne
> > UG <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiDonne>* | *WikiDonne Project
> > <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progetto:WikiDonne> *
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Il giorno ven 14 giu 2019 alle ore 14:32 Mister Thrapostibongles <
> > [hidden email]> ha scritto:
> >
> > > Fæ
> > >
> > > [...] the pre-existing understanding that the WMF do not replace
> > > > existing and perfectly adequate community agreed procedures for
> > > > banning bad behaviour on our projects.
> > >
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, there is ample evidence that the existing English
> > Wikipedia
> > > community processes are not "perfectly adequate" for that purpose.
> > >
> > >
> > > > If the English
> > > > Wikipedia's policies are not fit for purpose, or implementation of
> > > > policy is incompetent, we need a much bigger discussion
> > >
> > >
> > > Indeed.  Unfortunately the tone of the discussion here and at
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community_response_to_the_Wikimedia_Foundation%27s_ban_of_Fram
> > > suggests
> > > that the requisite discussion is now less, not more, likely to happen
> or
> > be
> > > productive.
> > >
> > > Thrapostibongles
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Mister Thrapostibongles
In reply to this post by Techman224-3
All,

A suggestion that I think might help to focus the discussion.

I suggest that anyone who wants to discuss what Fram might or might not
have done, and whether or not some acts that Frame might or might not have
done, or failed to do, merits the punishment that has been meted out should
refrain from doing so.  Since no-one with reliable information about
exactly what the complaints to T&S were is going to post here, and no-one
who posts here has any reliable information about them, all such
discussions here are based on guesses, assumptions, rumours or
confabulations, and can be of precisely no value whatsoever.

Thrapostibongles

On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 4:26 AM Techman224 <[hidden email]> 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:Fram_banned_for_1_year_by_WMF_office
> <
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bureaucrats'_noticeboard#User:Fram_banned_for_1_year_by_WMF_office
> >
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard#Request_for_ArbCom_to_comment_publicly_on_Fram's_ban
>
> [1]
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=901300528
> <
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=901300528
> >
> [2]
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bureaucrats%27_noticeboard#Statement_from_the_WMF_Trust_&_Safety_Team
>
> Techman224
>
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > From: George Herbert <[hidden email]>
> > Subject: [WikiEN-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block
> > Date: June 10, 2019 at 8:54:34 PM CDT
> > To: English Wikipedia <[hidden email]>
> > Reply-To: English Wikipedia <[hidden email]>
> >
> > 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:Fram_banned_for_1_year_by_WMF_office
> >
> > 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
> > [hidden email]
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Andy Mabbett-2
In reply to this post by Kirill Lokshin
On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 19:18, Kirill Lokshin <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Rather, the problem occurs when a *popular* competent editor violates the
> civility policy (or, for particularly popular editors, virtually any other
> policy); the traditional consensus-based approach to policy enforcement
> makes it difficult, if not impossible, to effectively sanction an editor
> with a substantial contingent of vocal supporters who will argue against
> any such sanctions whenever the opportunity arises.

This.

And a number (not everyone, of course) of those screaming loudest
about the WMF's recent action are those whose style of behaviour would
see them sanctioned if a civility policy were properly enforced.

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Vi to
Sometimes is hard to tell a harsh dispute from lack of civility.

Generally it's easy to focus on form rather than on substance.

Some issues are very complex to handle, for example some weeks ago,
criticizing someone (who wrote an aggravating email on this thread) brought
me to receive some truly nice insults in a private email. It's a very
complex case of a behavior which is formally "right" but which is widely
considered as destructive within the involved community.

WMF bans are meant to handle issues which cannot be handled by ordinary
community means, above all because they involve out-of-wiki elements.

In a recent incident I advocated for some changes in WMF ban (namely,
giving a wider framework to people which are supposed to help enforcing
them) but in my experience none of WMF ban I have sufficient background to
judge was unjustified.

Vito

Il giorno ven 14 giu 2019 alle ore 22:52 Andy Mabbett <
[hidden email]> ha scritto:

> On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 19:18, Kirill Lokshin <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Rather, the problem occurs when a *popular* competent editor violates the
> > civility policy (or, for particularly popular editors, virtually any
> other
> > policy); the traditional consensus-based approach to policy enforcement
> > makes it difficult, if not impossible, to effectively sanction an editor
> > with a substantial contingent of vocal supporters who will argue against
> > any such sanctions whenever the opportunity arises.
>
> This.
>
> And a number (not everyone, of course) of those screaming loudest
> about the WMF's recent action are those whose style of behaviour would
> see them sanctioned if a civility policy were properly enforced.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Robert Fernandez
In reply to this post by Todd Allen
Framing it as "competence over politeness" is convenient for the
people who do not want the latter and imagine they are the former.

It also insults the editors who have managed to do both.  I know an
en.wp editor who has dozens of FAs and somehow managed the herculean
feat of not referring to anyone on Wikipedia using the c-word.

Framing it as "the culture of the community" leaves out of the
community all of us who are sick of this behavior, including long-time
veterans of the community like myself (fifteen years), and community
victims of harassment asking T&S for help.


On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 1:58 PM Todd Allen <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> "Before asking why WMF has banned an admin (and if Fram was not an admin,
> all these discussions would not have been done), we need to ask ourselves
> why we (other users) have allowed such an attitude without intervening to
> stop it."
>
> First, if Fram were a well-known editor but not an admin, yes, there
> absolutely would be such a discussion. But as to why, the answer, very
> simply, is that the English Wikipedia community values competence over
> politeness, and probably always will. That is part of the culture of the
> community, and the WMF has no right to override that.
>
> Todd
>
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 6:46 AM camelia boban <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > I quote David and Isaac.
> > Harassment is a serious thing and hounding another user is out of any wiki
> > behavior.
> > Before asking why WMF has banned an admin (and if Fram was not an admin,
> > all these discussions would not have been done), we need to ask ourselves
> > why we (other users) have allowed such an attitude without intervening to
> > stop it.
> >
> >
> > Camelia
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Camelia Boban*
> >
> > *| Java EE Developer |*
> >
> > *Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia *Foundation
> > Coordinator - Diversity Working Group for Wikimedia Strategy 2030
> > Chair & co-founder - WikiDonne User Group *| WikiDonne Project ideator*
> >
> > *Diversity Space @ Wikimania 2019 Co-Lead*
> > WMIT - WMSE - WMCH - WMAR Member
> >
> > M. +39 3383385545
> > [hidden email]
> > *Aissa Technologies* <http://aissatechnologies.eu/>* | *Twitter
> > <https://twitter.com/cameliaboban> *|* *LinkedIn
> > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/camelia-boban-31319122>*
> > *Wikipedia <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Camelia.boban> **|
> > **WikiDonne
> > UG <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiDonne>* | *WikiDonne Project
> > <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progetto:WikiDonne> *
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Il giorno ven 14 giu 2019 alle ore 14:32 Mister Thrapostibongles <
> > [hidden email]> ha scritto:
> >
> > > Fæ
> > >
> > > [...] the pre-existing understanding that the WMF do not replace
> > > > existing and perfectly adequate community agreed procedures for
> > > > banning bad behaviour on our projects.
> > >
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, there is ample evidence that the existing English
> > Wikipedia
> > > community processes are not "perfectly adequate" for that purpose.
> > >
> > >
> > > > If the English
> > > > Wikipedia's policies are not fit for purpose, or implementation of
> > > > policy is incompetent, we need a much bigger discussion
> > >
> > >
> > > Indeed.  Unfortunately the tone of the discussion here and at
> > >
> > >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community_response_to_the_Wikimedia_Foundation%27s_ban_of_Fram
> > > suggests
> > > that the requisite discussion is now less, not more, likely to happen or
> > be
> > > productive.
> > >
> > > Thrapostibongles
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
1 ... 345678910