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

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
196 messages Options
1234567 ... 10
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Rebecca O'Neill
I didn't make any speculation as to the potential views of any
non-participating editors. I didn't even proffer my own view.

I do find it telling that the assumption was made as to what side I would
fall on. My problem with how these discussions unfold is that there is a
vocal minority that dominate every single last one of them which does
nothing to inspire me to engage (along with many other editors I know). You
are right that the length and tone of the discussions is a huge factor in
that, along with the general fatigue brought on by the wall of text effect.

There is a strong element of certain editors continuously setting the tone
of these discussions which is unbearably adversarial and exclusionary.

On Wed 12 Jun 2019, 22:33 Todd Allen, <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I don't believe we can presume everyone who hasn't participated in the
> discussion would like to disagree but is afraid to.
>
> Among all active contributors, I suspect non-participants are mostly a mix
> of unaware of the issue, don't have a strong opinion about the issue, don't
> understand what's happening and don't want to devote the time to
> understanding it, or don't care. Given the WMF's actions, there may indeed
> even be some who do not like what they've done, but are afraid to be seen
> speaking against them--look what happened to the last guy! And of course
> some people on both sides might be hesitant to enter a discussion that's
> rather heated and very fast-moving, not to mention the sheer size of the
> page to read just to catch up on what already happened.
>
> So, pretty much every discussion is decided by those who choose to
> participate in it. I don't know any way around that; we can't force people
> to participate. At some point, if you don't stick your hand up, you don't
> get counted.
>
> Todd
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 3:10 PM Rebecca O'Neill <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Just you reply to your point on how many people are speaking out against
> > this decision, I'm a relatively active and interested editor and I have
> no
> > interest in voicing my opinion there as the atmosphere is so toxic. There
> > is always a danger of the tyranny of a vocal and motivated minority
> > appearing to be the dominant opinion of the community as a whole. I would
> > proffer that that is a deeply flawed premise, if we were to take into
> > account the number of people engaged in this discussion and compare it to
> > the number of regular contributors.
> >
> > On Wed 12 Jun 2019, 22:01 Yaroslav Blanter, <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Just to summarize the difference between WMF and ArbCom, in view of the
> > > majority of the en.wiki community:
> > >
> > > We elect ArbCom, and if they do not do what they should be doing, they
> do
> > > not get re-elected in two years, which happens on a regular basis
> > >
> > > We do not elect WMF and in fact we have no means of influencing WMF
> > (apart
> > > of the three Trustees we elect every three years who are themselves
> > > typically alienated from the community). Short of taking down the
> > > fundraiser banner or of organizing a Wikipedia blackout.
> > >
> > > This is the difference, and this is why virtually everybody who had to
> > say
> > > smth about this episode was unhappy with the process. Without looking
> at
> > > the diffs, I only remember three users who were perfectly happy with
> what
> > > happened, out of hundreds who said smth.
> > >
> > > One unfortunate consequence of the whole episode was, whoever is right
> > and
> > > whoever is wrong, the general opinion about WMF in the community is
> > > all-time low, with people generally not prepared to believe to anything
> > > communicated to them. If WMF is not interested in getting very
> unpleasant
> > > surprises, they should start working towards building the community
> > trust.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Yaroslav
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 10:48 PM GorillaWarfare <
> > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 8:36 AM Fæ <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Any Arbcom approved sanction against Fram based on the evidence
> would
> > > not
> > > > > be controversial for anyone.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sorry for coming in late to this conversation; I've mostly been
> > following
> > > > the sicussion happening on-wiki. But I wanted to pipe up to say that
> I
> > > > absolutely do not believe this is true (see also my comment here
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard&type=revision&diff=901559520&oldid=901559137&diffmode=source
> > > > >).
> > > > To repeat my comment somewhat, the English Wikipedia ArbCom has in
> the
> > > past
> > > > had to place similar bans: that is, ones against long-term
> contributors
> > > > with many supporters, and ones in which the full details behind what
> > led
> > > to
> > > > the ban cannot be revealed publicly. The reaction has been quite
> > similar
> > > to
> > > > the one the WMF is currently experiencing—"star chamber" accusations,
> > > > claims that we've abused our power or the process, and assumptions
> that
> > > the
> > > > ban is unwarranted unless everyone is allowed to scrutinize the
> private
> > > > evidence. The ArbCom is empowered to take action based off of
> > > > privately-submitted evidence and private discussion, but in practice
> it
> > > is
> > > > extremely poorly-received when we do, basically across-the-board.
> > > >
> > > > – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GorillaWarfare
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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 Chris Keating-2
Going there dismissing the whole issue as a sexist mob doing GamerGate kind
of stuff, what was she expecting, really.

Paulo

A quarta, 12 de jun de 2019, 22:39, Chris Keating <
[hidden email]> escreveu:

> >
> > So, pretty much every discussion is decided by those who choose to
> > participate in it. I don't know any way around that; we can't force
> people
> > to participate. At some point, if you don't stick your hand up, you don't
> > get counted.
> >
> >
> Well, Maria Sefidari (Raystorm) showed up and ended up being faced with a
> torrent of abuse.
>
> If you don't stick your hand up, your views are invalid. If you do stick
> your hand up, people will shout at you about how invalid your views are.
> Particularly if you're a woman.
>
> I don't know what lesson we're all supposed to draw from this....
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Pine W
In reply to this post by Rebecca O'Neill
Hi Rebecca,

These conversations can be stressful for many of us, including me.

Speaking up in public can take courage. Thank you for participating here,
and I encourage you to continue to participate even if you are in the
minority regarding a certain discussion.

I know that this can be difficult to do, and it's sometimes difficult for
me to do, but please be careful about linking strong opinions with assuming
bad faith on the part of the people who state those opinions. Sometimes
there are good reasons for assuming bad faith, but I think that it's easy
for many of us, including me, to rush to the conclusion that someone who
disagrees with me may be acting in bad faith.

I am sorry if you feel that you are not welcome here. Public discussions
can be rough, but personally I think that they are usually for the best.

I hope that my comments here are somehow encouraging.

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User: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>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Rebecca O'Neill
Hi Pine,

While I appreciate your attempt at guidance here, given some of the
messages in the chain the fact that you are calling me out as assuming bad
faith out of all the participants does not inspire me to take part at all.

Thanks, but I feel that I might just go back to deleting these onerous
threads as has been my custom in the past rather than be singled out in
such a manner.

If I had wanted to be tone policed o would have engaged with the on-wiki
conversation.

Rebecca

On Wed 12 Jun 2019, 23:58 Pine W, <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Rebecca,
>
> These conversations can be stressful for many of us, including me.
>
> Speaking up in public can take courage. Thank you for participating here,
> and I encourage you to continue to participate even if you are in the
> minority regarding a certain discussion.
>
> I know that this can be difficult to do, and it's sometimes difficult for
> me to do, but please be careful about linking strong opinions with assuming
> bad faith on the part of the people who state those opinions. Sometimes
> there are good reasons for assuming bad faith, but I think that it's easy
> for many of us, including me, to rush to the conclusion that someone who
> disagrees with me may be acting in bad faith.
>
> I am sorry if you feel that you are not welcome here. Public discussions
> can be rough, but personally I think that they are usually for the best.
>
> I hope that my comments here are somehow encouraging.
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User: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>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Nathan Awrich
In reply to this post by Paulo Santos Perneta
A lot of different issues are being conflated by commenters on-wiki and
here, muddying the issue. The WMF responses and some others think that this
is about policing conduct, and the perennial difficulty of doing that
against people who have entrenched support and lots of positive
contributions. But that's not really it - even in the discussion, many
people acknowledge that Fram can be a jerk and has a lot of distance to
cover before they reach the community norm of appropriate behavior.

The problem is that most people were surprised by the blunt assertion of
WMF authority in a realm where they have mostly been absent. The appearance
is that an insider with a connection to Trust & Safety went outside
community processes to report what she viewed as (on-wiki) harassment. The
T&S team made a very token effort to intervene, and then imposed a high
profile ban with the flimsy excuse of a diff that says "fuck arbcom". They
then used that diff to excuse not including ArbCom, as if ArbCom had never
been subjected to any abuse before.

And then predictably the WMF can't eeeeven figure out how to help
themselves once the screw up has occurred. I take Philippe's point that
multiple levels of people contributed to the screw up, and the silly
meaningless responses (and the tepid defense of some other insiders) only
exacerbated the issue. The bottom line is that if WMF wants to change the
rules of who in en.wp is responsible for what, and lift conduct policing
from the community's responsibility, it has a duty to let people know in
advance. This is an echo of the lesson that the WMF has clearly failed to
learn despite many chances over the years (superprotect, LiquidThreads, a
dozen other features and changes people didn't like, and so on). When will
they learn? Philippe moved on, so the easy solution - put him in charge of
everything - isn't going to work.
_______________________________________________
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

Pine W
In reply to this post by Rebecca O'Neill
I'm sorry if my post sounded hostile. I wish that I knew what to say.


Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )


On Wed, Jun 12, 2019, 16:19 Rebecca O'Neill <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Pine,
>
> While I appreciate your attempt at guidance here, given some of the
> messages in the chain the fact that you are calling me out as assuming bad
> faith out of all the participants does not inspire me to take part at all.
>
> Thanks, but I feel that I might just go back to deleting these onerous
> threads as has been my custom in the past rather than be singled out in
> such a manner.
>
> If I had wanted to be tone policed o would have engaged with the on-wiki
> conversation.
>
> Rebecca
>
> On Wed 12 Jun 2019, 23:58 Pine W, <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hi Rebecca,
> >
> > These conversations can be stressful for many of us, including me.
> >
> > Speaking up in public can take courage. Thank you for participating here,
> > and I encourage you to continue to participate even if you are in the
> > minority regarding a certain discussion.
> >
> > I know that this can be difficult to do, and it's sometimes difficult for
> > me to do, but please be careful about linking strong opinions with
> assuming
> > bad faith on the part of the people who state those opinions. Sometimes
> > there are good reasons for assuming bad faith, but I think that it's easy
> > for many of us, including me, to rush to the conclusion that someone who
> > disagrees with me may be acting in bad faith.
> >
> > I am sorry if you feel that you are not welcome here. Public discussions
> > can be rough, but personally I think that they are usually for the best.
> >
> > I hope that my comments here are somehow encouraging.
> >
> > Pine
> > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User: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

Philippe Beaudette-4
In reply to this post by Nathan Awrich
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 4:20 PM Nathan <[hidden email]> wrote:

>   Philippe moved on, so the easy solution - put him in charge of
> everything - isn't going to work.



I laughed. Thank you for this. But remember, I was in front of Arbcomm for
a not too dissimilar case, being accused of overreaching and an unhelpful
response and tone (false, true and true, in that order). I learned from my
mistakes. More importantly, I hope (and believe) that the WMF learned from
my mistakes.

The people on the T&S team are neither dumb nor disconnected. Quite the
opposite. I hired and worked with a couple  of them and know them to be
talented, thoughtful and deliberate. I know Katherine to be the same.

On the basis of that “insider” knowledge - and that is truly all the
insider knowledge that I have here - I trust that there is more here that I
do not and can not know.

I trust the people and the process. I wish I could find a way to share that
trust in such a way that it would be adopted by more. Maybe you have to
live it to develop it,  but these are talented staff making hard decisions.
No doubt they will err some - but it’s not because they didn’t try
everything they know to get it right.

I wish we could put away the pitchforks - and also (on the wmf side) make
ourselves available and open to listening and sharing whatever we can - if
there is anything and try like hell to deescalate this thing.


Or give me time to go buy more popcorn. One or the other.

Philippe



> _______________________________________________
> 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>

--
Philippe Beaudette
[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
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

Rebecca O'Neill
In reply to this post by Pine W
It wasn't hostile Pine, but it wasn't a great idea to call out one of the
few women on the chain for assuming bad faith given some of the other
statements and assertions on the thread.

I did not make any assumptions on the motivations of those who take part in
the on wiki discussions, I just stated that the results were often hostile
environments which make engagement difficult or intimidating. And then I am
name checked for making this rather mundane and oft cited issue. It was
just a poor choice given the circumstances overall.

I don't take part as a I don't want my "card to be marked" or have certain
editors monitoring my on wiki contributions based on assumptions made about
me and my editing motivations.

On Thu 13 Jun 2019, 00:33 Pine W, <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'm sorry if my post sounded hostile. I wish that I knew what to say.
>
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019, 16:19 Rebecca O'Neill <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Pine,
> >
> > While I appreciate your attempt at guidance here, given some of the
> > messages in the chain the fact that you are calling me out as assuming
> bad
> > faith out of all the participants does not inspire me to take part at
> all.
> >
> > Thanks, but I feel that I might just go back to deleting these onerous
> > threads as has been my custom in the past rather than be singled out in
> > such a manner.
> >
> > If I had wanted to be tone policed o would have engaged with the on-wiki
> > conversation.
> >
> > Rebecca
> >
> > On Wed 12 Jun 2019, 23:58 Pine W, <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Rebecca,
> > >
> > > These conversations can be stressful for many of us, including me.
> > >
> > > Speaking up in public can take courage. Thank you for participating
> here,
> > > and I encourage you to continue to participate even if you are in the
> > > minority regarding a certain discussion.
> > >
> > > I know that this can be difficult to do, and it's sometimes difficult
> for
> > > me to do, but please be careful about linking strong opinions with
> > assuming
> > > bad faith on the part of the people who state those opinions. Sometimes
> > > there are good reasons for assuming bad faith, but I think that it's
> easy
> > > for many of us, including me, to rush to the conclusion that someone
> who
> > > disagrees with me may be acting in bad faith.
> > >
> > > I am sorry if you feel that you are not welcome here. Public
> discussions
> > > can be rough, but personally I think that they are usually for the
> best.
> > >
> > > I hope that my comments here are somehow encouraging.
> > >
> > > Pine
> > > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User: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

Pine W
In reply to this post by Nathan Awrich
Nathan,

Continuing on my theme of assuming good faith:

I think that the assumption of good faith needs to go in all ways, which
includes that WMF should assume good faith of ENWP and that ENWP should
assume good faith of WMF. I had some very critical comments in mind earlier
but I am trying to take my own advice regarding not rushing to judgement.
Also, I think that WMF might be more willing to listen to me in this case
if I don't go too far with my critique.

I think that WMF should not have done this, but I also was very unhappy to
read an allegation that some people at ENWP are being aggressive about
looking for individual people to blame. I hope that we (and I include
myself) can discuss this situation civilly and without going too far.

Sincerely, another imperfect person,

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )


On Wed, Jun 12, 2019, 16:19 Nathan <[hidden email]> wrote:

> A lot of different issues are being conflated by commenters on-wiki and
> here, muddying the issue. The WMF responses and some others think that this
> is about policing conduct, and the perennial difficulty of doing that
> against people who have entrenched support and lots of positive
> contributions. But that's not really it - even in the discussion, many
> people acknowledge that Fram can be a jerk and has a lot of distance to
> cover before they reach the community norm of appropriate behavior.
>
> The problem is that most people were surprised by the blunt assertion of
> WMF authority in a realm where they have mostly been absent. The appearance
> is that an insider with a connection to Trust & Safety went outside
> community processes to report what she viewed as (on-wiki) harassment. The
> T&S team made a very token effort to intervene, and then imposed a high
> profile ban with the flimsy excuse of a diff that says "fuck arbcom". They
> then used that diff to excuse not including ArbCom, as if ArbCom had never
> been subjected to any abuse before.
>
> And then predictably the WMF can't eeeeven figure out how to help
> themselves once the screw up has occurred. I take Philippe's point that
> multiple levels of people contributed to the screw up, and the silly
> meaningless responses (and the tepid defense of some other insiders) only
> exacerbated the issue. The bottom line is that if WMF wants to change the
> rules of who in en.wp is responsible for what, and lift conduct policing
> from the community's responsibility, it has a duty to let people know in
> advance. This is an echo of the lesson that the WMF has clearly failed to
> learn despite many chances over the years (superprotect, LiquidThreads, a
> dozen other features and changes people didn't like, and so on). When will
> they learn? Philippe moved on, so the easy solution - put him in charge of
> everything - isn't going to work.
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Dennis During
In reply to this post by Rebecca O'Neill
This seems like a mighty menacing line of discourse, coming from someone in
a position to initiate a block.  I don't think I should participate in any
WP or WMF or Commons or WikiData discussions if such menace is the norm.

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 8:05 PM Rebecca O'Neill <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> It wasn't hostile Pine, but it wasn't a great idea to call out one of the
> few women on the chain for assuming bad faith given some of the other
> statements and assertions on the thread.
>
> I did not make any assumptions on the motivations of those who take part in
> the on wiki discussions, I just stated that the results were often hostile
> environments which make engagement difficult or intimidating. And then I am
> name checked for making this rather mundane and oft cited issue. It was
> just a poor choice given the circumstances overall.
>
> I don't take part as a I don't want my "card to be marked" or have certain
> editors monitoring my on wiki contributions based on assumptions made about
> me and my editing motivations.
>
> On Thu 13 Jun 2019, 00:33 Pine W, <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > I'm sorry if my post sounded hostile. I wish that I knew what to say.
> >
> >
> > Pine
> > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019, 16:19 Rebecca O'Neill <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Pine,
> > >
> > > While I appreciate your attempt at guidance here, given some of the
> > > messages in the chain the fact that you are calling me out as assuming
> > bad
> > > faith out of all the participants does not inspire me to take part at
> > all.
> > >
> > > Thanks, but I feel that I might just go back to deleting these onerous
> > > threads as has been my custom in the past rather than be singled out in
> > > such a manner.
> > >
> > > If I had wanted to be tone policed o would have engaged with the
> on-wiki
> > > conversation.
> > >
> > > Rebecca
> > >
> > > On Wed 12 Jun 2019, 23:58 Pine W, <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Rebecca,
> > > >
> > > > These conversations can be stressful for many of us, including me.
> > > >
> > > > Speaking up in public can take courage. Thank you for participating
> > here,
> > > > and I encourage you to continue to participate even if you are in the
> > > > minority regarding a certain discussion.
> > > >
> > > > I know that this can be difficult to do, and it's sometimes difficult
> > for
> > > > me to do, but please be careful about linking strong opinions with
> > > assuming
> > > > bad faith on the part of the people who state those opinions.
> Sometimes
> > > > there are good reasons for assuming bad faith, but I think that it's
> > easy
> > > > for many of us, including me, to rush to the conclusion that someone
> > who
> > > > disagrees with me may be acting in bad faith.
> > > >
> > > > I am sorry if you feel that you are not welcome here. Public
> > discussions
> > > > can be rough, but personally I think that they are usually for the
> > best.
> > > >
> > > > I hope that my comments here are somehow encouraging.
> > > >
> > > > Pine
> > > > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User: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>



--
Dennis C. During
_______________________________________________
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

Pine W
Thanks for the concern, Dennis, but I am not feeling threatened and I don't
fully understand the source of your concern. I suggest that we not increase
the tension any further, please.

(I need to go do something else besides participate in this thread, but
anyone is welcome to email me off list or leave a note on my talk page if
they want to talk to me in particular.)

Thank you,

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User: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>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Peter Southwood
In reply to this post by Mister Thrapostibongles
Not that Peter Southwood.
Are you a different Thrapostibongles? I couldn’t find one.
Cheers,
Peter Southwood.


-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Mister Thrapostibongles
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 4:22 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Peter

Thank you for raising that issue.  Since user Peter Southwood has just one
recorded edit on English Wikipedia, from 2012, (see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Peter_Southwood) I'm
puzzled by your speaking on behalf of the volunteer community. ("we do not
generally appreciate pontification from outsiders")

Thrapostibongles

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 2:53 PM Peter Southwood <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Thrapostibongles,
> I am not familiar with your name on enwiki, so I looked you up, and find
> that you have a grand total of 11 edits on all projects since 2015.
> While it is possible that you have a long and distinguished edit history
> under a previous name or as an IP editor, it leads me to wonder just how
> familiar you are with the customs and culture of enwiki, which I freely
> agree are non-optimal, but have evolved to sort of work in an environment
> which was predicted to be impossible. Yet here we are, dysfunctionally
> surviving when we are theoretically long extinct. Our dysfunctional mores
> function as they do and evolve through surviving and occasional
> modification by consensus of those who care enough to take part in the
> process, within the environment in which we work. We are somewhere between
> an anarchy and a community, and we do not generally appreciate
> pontification from outsiders, which is what you appear to be, and to a
> large extent, what we consider WMF to be. It is a problem. If WMF chooses
> to rule by fiat it will have interesting consequences. So far they have
> mostly avoided that, and when they have it has not ended well. If you
> consider yourself an expert in something relevant I invite you to show
> evidence of your credentials. Otherwise we will take your comments as we do
> those of any other unproven internet commentator.
> This is just my personal take, I do not presume to represent anyone else.
> You are as free to ignore me as I am to ignore you, but engaging in this
> discussion has its consequences, and one of them is to be questioned.
> Cheers,
> Peter Southwood
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> Behalf Of Mister Thrapostibongles
> Sent: 12 June 2019 09:06
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block
>
> Yaroslav,
>
> I think it's reasonably clear that the English Wikipedia community and its
> community structures, such as its Arbitration Committee, and processes are
> not capable of maintaining a productive, harassment-free environment for
> the volunteer workers.  For example, they have consistently failed, after
> several attempts, to handle the case of a volunteer who used the word
> "Cxxx" about a fellow worker, and the community has agreed that telling
> others to "Fxxx off" is acceptable.  These are symptoms of a dysfunctional
> community, which tolerates behaviour that is unacceptable in any collegial
> working environment, and it is right that the Foundation should step in.
>
> Thrapostibongles
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 4:56 PM Yaroslav Blanter <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > The point made by pretty much everyone is not that Fram should or should
> > not be banned, but that the process in this case should have followed the
> > standard dispute resolution avenues, More specifically, the case should
> > have been communicated to the Arbitration Committee, whose members did
> sign
> > the non-disclosure agreement.
> >
> > This is different from the past cases when users were banned by WMF,
> since
> > in this case it was made clear the case is based on on-wiki open activity
> > of Fram (and, specifically, only on the English Wikipedia). The on-wiki
> > activity is subject to the community policies.
> >
> > To be clear, I am not a friend of Fram, and in the past supported desysop
> > on a number of occasions.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Yaroslav
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 5:46 PM Amir Sarabadani <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > People who oppose the ban: Are you aware of all aspects and things Fram
> > has
> > > done? Do you have the full picture? It's really saddening to see how
> fast
> > > people jump to conclusion in page mentioned in the email. I personally,
> > > don't know what happened so I neither can support or oppose the ban. As
> > > simple as that.
> > >
> > > So what should be done IMO. If enwiki wants to know more, a community
> > body
> > > can ask for more information, if body satisfy two things:
> > >  - They had signed NDA not to disclose the case
> > >  - They are trusted by the community
> > >
> > > I think the only body can sorta work with this is stewards but not sure
> > > (Does ArbCom NDA'ed?)
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 3:58 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Lack of transparency from the WMF, whatelse is new.
> > > > I'm currently under a funding ban secretly decided (by who?) based
> on a
> > > > false accusation, without providing any evidence. Until now I'm
> waiting
> > > for
> > > > an explanation from the WMF. So, this sort of attitude doesn't
> surprise
> > > me
> > > > at all.
> > > > It is very unfortunate that the WMF apparently thrives in this kind
> of
> > > > medieval obscurity, the opposite of the values of the Wikimedia
> > Movement.
> > > > Matter for Roles & Reponsibilities.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Paulo
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Benjamin Ikuta <[hidden email]> escreveu no dia terça,
> > > 11/06/2019
> > > > à(s) 05:45:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for this.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm glad to see I'm not the only one dismayed by the unilateralism
> > and
> > > > > lack of transparency.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Jun 10, 2019, at 8:25 PM, 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>
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Amir (he/him)
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Peter Southwood
In reply to this post by Mister Thrapostibongles
Check your facts.
P

-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Mister Thrapostibongles
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 5:48 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Peter

You say that Wikipedia belongs to "us".  You are mistaken.  In so far as it
belongs to anyone, it belongs to the Foundation.

Thrapostibongles

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 3:35 PM Peter Southwood <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> "We" are a subset of everyone. If Wikipedia belongs to everyone, it
> belongs to "us" as well.  It seems that Fram who was one of us has just
> been excluded from our community by questionable process. I agree that this
> should not happen, but suggest that it is sometimes necessary to exclude
> people from our community when they are shown in fair process to be unable
> to cooperate in furthering the purposes of the project. Some of us try to
> make it reasonably easy and pleasant to join the community and help build
> the project, but it is not compulsory, either to make it pleasant, or to
> join. However credibility and respect beyond that which should be afforded
> to anyone by virtue of being human are earned.
> Cheers,
> P
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> Behalf Of Robert Fernandez
> Sent: 12 June 2019 16:08
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block
>
> > I am not familiar with your name on enwiki, so I looked you up, and find
> that you have a grand total of 11 edits on all projects since 2015.
>
> This is part of the problem right here.  This isn't our project and we
> shouldn't be trying to exclude people from our community.  Wikipedia
> belongs to everyone.
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 9:53 AM Peter Southwood
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Thrapostibongles,
> > I am not familiar with your name on enwiki, so I looked you up, and find
> that you have a grand total of 11 edits on all projects since 2015.
> > While it is possible that you have a long and distinguished edit history
> under a previous name or as an IP editor, it leads me to wonder just how
> familiar you are with the customs and culture of enwiki, which I freely
> agree are non-optimal, but have evolved to sort of work in an environment
> which was predicted to be impossible. Yet here we are, dysfunctionally
> surviving when we are theoretically long extinct. Our dysfunctional mores
> function as they do and evolve through surviving and occasional
> modification by consensus of those who care enough to take part in the
> process, within the environment in which we work. We are somewhere between
> an anarchy and a community, and we do not generally appreciate
> pontification from outsiders, which is what you appear to be, and to a
> large extent, what we consider WMF to be. It is a problem. If WMF chooses
> to rule by fiat it will have interesting consequences. So far they have
> mostly avoided that, and when they have it has not ended well. If you
> consider yourself an expert in something relevant I invite you to show
> evidence of your credentials. Otherwise we will take your comments as we do
> those of any other unproven internet commentator.
> > This is just my personal take, I do not presume to represent anyone
> else. You are as free to ignore me as I am to ignore you, but engaging in
> this discussion has its consequences, and one of them is to be questioned.
> > Cheers,
> > Peter Southwood
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> Behalf Of Mister Thrapostibongles
> > Sent: 12 June 2019 09:06
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block
> >
> > Yaroslav,
> >
> > I think it's reasonably clear that the English Wikipedia community and
> its
> > community structures, such as its Arbitration Committee, and processes
> are
> > not capable of maintaining a productive, harassment-free environment for
> > the volunteer workers.  For example, they have consistently failed, after
> > several attempts, to handle the case of a volunteer who used the word
> > "Cxxx" about a fellow worker, and the community has agreed that telling
> > others to "Fxxx off" is acceptable.  These are symptoms of a
> dysfunctional
> > community, which tolerates behaviour that is unacceptable in any
> collegial
> > working environment, and it is right that the Foundation should step in.
> >
> > Thrapostibongles
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 4:56 PM Yaroslav Blanter <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > The point made by pretty much everyone is not that Fram should or
> should
> > > not be banned, but that the process in this case should have followed
> the
> > > standard dispute resolution avenues, More specifically, the case should
> > > have been communicated to the Arbitration Committee, whose members did
> sign
> > > the non-disclosure agreement.
> > >
> > > This is different from the past cases when users were banned by WMF,
> since
> > > in this case it was made clear the case is based on on-wiki open
> activity
> > > of Fram (and, specifically, only on the English Wikipedia). The on-wiki
> > > activity is subject to the community policies.
> > >
> > > To be clear, I am not a friend of Fram, and in the past supported
> desysop
> > > on a number of occasions.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Yaroslav
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 5:46 PM Amir Sarabadani <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > People who oppose the ban: Are you aware of all aspects and things
> Fram
> > > has
> > > > done? Do you have the full picture? It's really saddening to see how
> fast
> > > > people jump to conclusion in page mentioned in the email. I
> personally,
> > > > don't know what happened so I neither can support or oppose the ban.
> As
> > > > simple as that.
> > > >
> > > > So what should be done IMO. If enwiki wants to know more, a community
> > > body
> > > > can ask for more information, if body satisfy two things:
> > > >  - They had signed NDA not to disclose the case
> > > >  - They are trusted by the community
> > > >
> > > > I think the only body can sorta work with this is stewards but not
> sure
> > > > (Does ArbCom NDA'ed?)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 3:58 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Lack of transparency from the WMF, whatelse is new.
> > > > > I'm currently under a funding ban secretly decided (by who?) based
> on a
> > > > > false accusation, without providing any evidence. Until now I'm
> waiting
> > > > for
> > > > > an explanation from the WMF. So, this sort of attitude doesn't
> surprise
> > > > me
> > > > > at all.
> > > > > It is very unfortunate that the WMF apparently thrives in this
> kind of
> > > > > medieval obscurity, the opposite of the values of the Wikimedia
> > > Movement.
> > > > > Matter for Roles & Reponsibilities.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Paulo
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Benjamin Ikuta <[hidden email]> escreveu no dia terça,
> > > > 11/06/2019
> > > > > à(s) 05:45:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm glad to see I'm not the only one dismayed by the
> unilateralism
> > > and
> > > > > > lack of transparency.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Jun 10, 2019, at 8:25 PM, 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>
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Amir (he/him)
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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>
> >
> > ---
> > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> > https://www.avg.com
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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

David Gerard-2
In reply to this post by Nathan Awrich
On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 00:19, Nathan <[hidden email]> wrote:

>  The
> T&S team made a very token effort to intervene, and then imposed a high
> profile ban with the flimsy excuse of a diff that says "fuck arbcom". They
> then used that diff to excuse not including ArbCom, as if ArbCom had never
> been subjected to any abuse before.

Did they actually do that, or was that Fram claiming it was the cause?


- d.

_______________________________________________
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

Yair Rand
User:Fram posted on Commons a slice of what is purportedly the email from
T&S, which says that "this ban has been triggered following your recent
abusive communications on the project, as seen here" linking to the diff in
question (#895438118). The WMFOffice account has made three statements
since the discussion of the post began (these statements made on the same
page where that discussion occured), none of which denied (or referenced at
all) the accuracy of the snippet. That's all we know.

-- Yair Rand

‫בתאריך יום ה׳, 13 ביוני 2019 ב-1:59 מאת ‪David Gerard‬‏ <‪[hidden email]
‬‏>:‬

> On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 00:19, Nathan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> >  The
> > T&S team made a very token effort to intervene, and then imposed a high
> > profile ban with the flimsy excuse of a diff that says "fuck arbcom".
> They
> > then used that diff to excuse not including ArbCom, as if ArbCom had
> never
> > been subjected to any abuse before.
>
> Did they actually do that, or was that Fram claiming it was the cause?
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

George William Herbert
In reply to this post by Philippe Beaudette-4
Phillipe wrote in part:

I trust the people and the process. I wish I could find a way to share that
> trust in such a way that it would be adopted by more. Maybe you have to
> live it to develop it,  but these are talented staff making hard decisions.
> No doubt they will err some - but it’s not because they didn’t try
> everything they know to get it right.


When I sent my first email on all this, I tried to be as trusting and open
as possible.  But something troubled me greatly and I have still not seen
any hypotheticals or specifics to address it.

In the past, as I understood it, there was a null set of things that could
be done by someone that would justify Office taking action like this and
wouldn't result in a lifetime permanent ban.

Everything else, to my knowledge, was safe to handle somewhere between
privately in Arbcom and normally on-Wiki.

The combination of "Something Office needed to do" and "It's only for a
year" breaks my head and my heart.  There obviously has to be an
explanation here.  If that's not really an empty set of things that Office
could need to do in this manner and might not result in permanent bans,
then Office and the Foundation staff really really owe the community a
clear explanation of the criteria used to determine that.

I should not be sitting here days later wondering even what category of
problem this could be in that resulted in the action.

I don't need this answered today, but it does need to get answered.  The
difference between a court which sometimes has to act in secret and a Star
Chamber is that people can tell what the rules are for the court that
sometimes has to act in secret.  Either Office are acting like a court that
sometimes has to act in secret, or Office and En.Wikipedia do in fact have
a catastrophic problem.  We need to know the parameters.

-george


On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 5:02 PM Philippe Beaudette <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 4:20 PM Nathan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> >   Philippe moved on, so the easy solution - put him in charge of
> > everything - isn't going to work.
>
>
>
> I laughed. Thank you for this. But remember, I was in front of Arbcomm for
> a not too dissimilar case, being accused of overreaching and an unhelpful
> response and tone (false, true and true, in that order). I learned from my
> mistakes. More importantly, I hope (and believe) that the WMF learned from
> my mistakes.
>
> The people on the T&S team are neither dumb nor disconnected. Quite the
> opposite. I hired and worked with a couple  of them and know them to be
> talented, thoughtful and deliberate. I know Katherine to be the same.
>
> On the basis of that “insider” knowledge - and that is truly all the
> insider knowledge that I have here - I trust that there is more here that I
> do not and can not know.
>
> I trust the people and the process. I wish I could find a way to share that
> trust in such a way that it would be adopted by more. Maybe you have to
> live it to develop it,  but these are talented staff making hard decisions.
> No doubt they will err some - but it’s not because they didn’t try
> everything they know to get it right.
>
> I wish we could put away the pitchforks - and also (on the wmf side) make
> ourselves available and open to listening and sharing whatever we can - if
> there is anything and try like hell to deescalate this thing.
>
>
> Or give me time to go buy more popcorn. One or the other.
>
> Philippe
>
>
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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>
>
> --
> Philippe Beaudette
> [hidden email]
> _______________________________________________
> 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>



--
-george william herbert
[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
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 Peter Southwood
Peter

On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 6:45 AM Peter Southwood <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Check your facts.
> P
>

Well, the Wikipedia trademark is owned by the Foundation, along with a
variety of related marks, see
https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_trademarks  The servers on
which the content of Wikipedia resides are rented and paid for by the
Foundation, see https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_servers  The
intellectual property in that  content is very largely owned by the very
disparate individuals who contributed, each of whom owns the IPR in their
own individual contributons, see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyrights  These are the facts, --
do you wish to dispute them?

Thrapostibongles

>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> Behalf Of Mister Thrapostibongles
> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 5:48 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block
>
> Peter
>
> You say that Wikipedia belongs to "us".  You are mistaken.  In so far as it
> belongs to anyone, it belongs to the Foundation.
>
> Thrapostibongles
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 3:35 PM Peter Southwood <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > "We" are a subset of everyone. If Wikipedia belongs to everyone, it
> > belongs to "us" as well.  It seems that Fram who was one of us has just
> > been excluded from our community by questionable process. I agree that
> this
> > should not happen, but suggest that it is sometimes necessary to exclude
> > people from our community when they are shown in fair process to be
> unable
> > to cooperate in furthering the purposes of the project. Some of us try to
> > make it reasonably easy and pleasant to join the community and help build
> > the project, but it is not compulsory, either to make it pleasant, or to
> > join. However credibility and respect beyond that which should be
> afforded
> > to anyone by virtue of being human are earned.
> > Cheers,
> > P
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> > Behalf Of Robert Fernandez
> > Sent: 12 June 2019 16:08
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block
> >
> > > I am not familiar with your name on enwiki, so I looked you up, and
> find
> > that you have a grand total of 11 edits on all projects since 2015.
> >
> > This is part of the problem right here.  This isn't our project and we
> > shouldn't be trying to exclude people from our community.  Wikipedia
> > belongs to everyone.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 9:53 AM Peter Southwood
> > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thrapostibongles,
> > > I am not familiar with your name on enwiki, so I looked you up, and
> find
> > that you have a grand total of 11 edits on all projects since 2015.
> > > While it is possible that you have a long and distinguished edit
> history
> > under a previous name or as an IP editor, it leads me to wonder just how
> > familiar you are with the customs and culture of enwiki, which I freely
> > agree are non-optimal, but have evolved to sort of work in an environment
> > which was predicted to be impossible. Yet here we are, dysfunctionally
> > surviving when we are theoretically long extinct. Our dysfunctional mores
> > function as they do and evolve through surviving and occasional
> > modification by consensus of those who care enough to take part in the
> > process, within the environment in which we work. We are somewhere
> between
> > an anarchy and a community, and we do not generally appreciate
> > pontification from outsiders, which is what you appear to be, and to a
> > large extent, what we consider WMF to be. It is a problem. If WMF chooses
> > to rule by fiat it will have interesting consequences. So far they have
> > mostly avoided that, and when they have it has not ended well. If you
> > consider yourself an expert in something relevant I invite you to show
> > evidence of your credentials. Otherwise we will take your comments as we
> do
> > those of any other unproven internet commentator.
> > > This is just my personal take, I do not presume to represent anyone
> > else. You are as free to ignore me as I am to ignore you, but engaging in
> > this discussion has its consequences, and one of them is to be
> questioned.
> > > Cheers,
> > > Peter Southwood
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> > Behalf Of Mister Thrapostibongles
> > > Sent: 12 June 2019 09:06
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block
> > >
> > > Yaroslav,
> > >
> > > I think it's reasonably clear that the English Wikipedia community and
> > its
> > > community structures, such as its Arbitration Committee, and processes
> > are
> > > not capable of maintaining a productive, harassment-free environment
> for
> > > the volunteer workers.  For example, they have consistently failed,
> after
> > > several attempts, to handle the case of a volunteer who used the word
> > > "Cxxx" about a fellow worker, and the community has agreed that telling
> > > others to "Fxxx off" is acceptable.  These are symptoms of a
> > dysfunctional
> > > community, which tolerates behaviour that is unacceptable in any
> > collegial
> > > working environment, and it is right that the Foundation should step
> in.
> > >
> > > Thrapostibongles
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 4:56 PM Yaroslav Blanter <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > The point made by pretty much everyone is not that Fram should or
> > should
> > > > not be banned, but that the process in this case should have followed
> > the
> > > > standard dispute resolution avenues, More specifically, the case
> should
> > > > have been communicated to the Arbitration Committee, whose members
> did
> > sign
> > > > the non-disclosure agreement.
> > > >
> > > > This is different from the past cases when users were banned by WMF,
> > since
> > > > in this case it was made clear the case is based on on-wiki open
> > activity
> > > > of Fram (and, specifically, only on the English Wikipedia). The
> on-wiki
> > > > activity is subject to the community policies.
> > > >
> > > > To be clear, I am not a friend of Fram, and in the past supported
> > desysop
> > > > on a number of occasions.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > > Yaroslav
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 5:46 PM Amir Sarabadani <[hidden email]
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > People who oppose the ban: Are you aware of all aspects and things
> > Fram
> > > > has
> > > > > done? Do you have the full picture? It's really saddening to see
> how
> > fast
> > > > > people jump to conclusion in page mentioned in the email. I
> > personally,
> > > > > don't know what happened so I neither can support or oppose the
> ban.
> > As
> > > > > simple as that.
> > > > >
> > > > > So what should be done IMO. If enwiki wants to know more, a
> community
> > > > body
> > > > > can ask for more information, if body satisfy two things:
> > > > >  - They had signed NDA not to disclose the case
> > > > >  - They are trusted by the community
> > > > >
> > > > > I think the only body can sorta work with this is stewards but not
> > sure
> > > > > (Does ArbCom NDA'ed?)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 3:58 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Lack of transparency from the WMF, whatelse is new.
> > > > > > I'm currently under a funding ban secretly decided (by who?)
> based
> > on a
> > > > > > false accusation, without providing any evidence. Until now I'm
> > waiting
> > > > > for
> > > > > > an explanation from the WMF. So, this sort of attitude doesn't
> > surprise
> > > > > me
> > > > > > at all.
> > > > > > It is very unfortunate that the WMF apparently thrives in this
> > kind of
> > > > > > medieval obscurity, the opposite of the values of the Wikimedia
> > > > Movement.
> > > > > > Matter for Roles & Reponsibilities.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > Paulo
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Benjamin Ikuta <[hidden email]> escreveu no dia terça,
> > > > > 11/06/2019
> > > > > > à(s) 05:45:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks for this.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm glad to see I'm not the only one dismayed by the
> > unilateralism
> > > > and
> > > > > > > lack of transparency.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Jun 10, 2019, at 8:25 PM, 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>
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > 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>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Amir (he/him)
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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>
> > >
> > > ---
> > > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> > > https://www.avg.com
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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

Chris Keating-2
In reply to this post by Paulo Santos Perneta
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 11:48 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Going there dismissing the whole issue as a sexist mob doing GamerGate kind
> of stuff, what was she expecting, really.
>
>
Maybe she was expecting people to read what she actually said, and engage
with it, rather than twist her words so they're easy to dismiss?

Maybe she was hoping people might think about whether there WAS some sexist
harrassment happening, and whether parts of our community were actually
behaving a bit like Gamergaters?
_______________________________________________
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
What is the point of addressing and lecturing an onwiki community about
harassment happening offwiki, and then using that to imply all happening on
that situation onwiki was about sexism and GamerGate stuff?

Really, going into an already very escalated situation and making such
baseless and inflammatory comments does not seem like the wisest thing to
do.

Paulo

A quinta, 13 de jun de 2019, 08:15, Chris Keating <
[hidden email]> escreveu:

> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 11:48 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Going there dismissing the whole issue as a sexist mob doing GamerGate
> kind
> > of stuff, what was she expecting, really.
> >
> >
> Maybe she was expecting people to read what she actually said, and engage
> with it, rather than twist her words so they're easy to dismiss?
>
> Maybe she was hoping people might think about whether there WAS some sexist
> harrassment happening, and whether parts of our community were actually
> behaving a bit like Gamergaters?
> _______________________________________________
> 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 Chris Keating-2
A number of people in our community literally are Gamergaters,
including editors with tools.

On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 3:15 AM Chris Keating
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 11:48 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Going there dismissing the whole issue as a sexist mob doing GamerGate kind
> > of stuff, what was she expecting, really.
> >
> >
> Maybe she was expecting people to read what she actually said, and engage
> with it, rather than twist her words so they're easy to dismiss?
>
> Maybe she was hoping people might think about whether there WAS some sexist
> harrassment happening, and whether parts of our community were actually
> behaving a bit like Gamergaters?
> _______________________________________________
> 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>
1234567 ... 10