Backdoor PROJSOCK spooks I/P CT editors ARBPIA 5? incoming?

[Kraken]

Just a very minor bit of ArbCom business to update folks on....

Oh hey guys.

There's this cat Mschwartz1 (T-C-L) who we been chatting with for weeks, who has some beef about disruptive editing in the Arab-Israeli conflict. We're not sure what it's about, but we've checked him out, and he seems legit. We've told him we await his request for either an AE or full Case. He wanted to keep it on the down low but we said no dude, no private evidence, no private lounge.

Don't sweat it. We got your back peeps. Communitaaaah!

By the way. He has zero edits.

OK bye.

It may or may not be about the recent World Jewish Congress report. Primefac sez "nothing in our communications have indicated any connection" but he say a lot of shit.

I thought this was especially rich....

I should think we would not be so easily hoodwinked as everyone seems to assume; the gaps in disclosure are just private information that we cannot reveal. Primefac (talk) 10:15, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Maybe he's already been replaced, but due to a glitch, it has not been able to access the memories of the Primefac carbon unit.

The Why are the Wheels on this Car so Loose Tour continues apace, and it's not even the end of March.

[rnu]

Complaint #1: User:Nidhidani conduct
Closed as wrong location.

[Bezdomni]

Complaint #1: User:Nidhidani conduct
Closed as wrong location.

& cites Sandstein.

That said, I have little doubt that Nishidani's rhetorical flourishes sometimes send him right overboard.

:ploof:

he always gets fished back out before the sea-monsters can get him though, so there's that

[rnu]

Complaint #1: User:Nidhidani conduct
Closed as wrong location.

& cites Sandstein.

And cases involving our dear friends Drsmoo and Andrevan.

[utbc]

Complaint #1: User:Nidhidani conduct

The whole script:
Complaint #2: User:Nableezy conduct
Complaint #3: User:Zero0000 conduct
Complaint #4: User:Selfstudier conduct
Complaint #5: User:Iskandar323 conduct
followed by "delete all mentions of genocide and occupation right the F now or we call you antisemitic". Given how utterly clueless arbcom currently is, it might choose to sacrifice someone.

[utbc]

The Polish whatever last year, and now this. Arbcom somehow has got the impression that Wikipedia PR is its responsibility. I am guessing MSchwartz used an ADL email.

[nableezy]

Complaint #1: User:Nidhidani conduct

The whole script:
Complaint #2: User:Nableezy conduct
Complaint #3: User:Zero0000 conduct
Complaint #4: User:Selfstudier conduct
Complaint #5: User:Iskandar323 conduct
followed by "delete all mentions of genocide and occupation right the F now or we call you antisemitic". Given how utterly clueless arbcom currently is, it might choose to sacrifice someone.

The thing that bothers me about this is the idea that an organization, with a budget and employees, can present a case against some random person with a library card, eg Nishidani, or complainant number 2 for that matter. And for the record, there's only one side here that has these budgets and employees and organized efforts, from CAMERA to an NGO Monitor employee editing, to a former Israeli prime minister in his past role as head of the settler council in the West Bank hosting a training camp for people to edit Wikipedia, there's only one side here that is organizing, and spending, to skew content.

[Hemiauchenia]

Reminds me of the hysterical rants that David Collier used to write about Wikipedia being edited by "antisemites and terrorist supporters" https://david-collier.com/project-wikipedia/

[utbc]

Complaint #1: User:Nidhidani conduct

The whole script:
Complaint #2: User:Nableezy conduct
Complaint #3: User:Zero0000 conduct
Complaint #4: User:Selfstudier conduct
Complaint #5: User:Iskandar323 conduct
followed by "delete all mentions of genocide and occupation right the F now or we call you antisemitic". Given how utterly clueless arbcom currently is, it might choose to sacrifice someone.

The thing that bothers me about this is the idea that an organization, with a budget and employees, can present a case against some random person with a library card, eg Nishidani, or complainant number 2 for that matter. And for the record, there's only one side here that has these budgets and employees and organized efforts, from CAMERA to an NGO Monitor employee editing, to a former Israeli prime minister in his past role as head of the settler council in the West Bank hosting a training camp for people to edit Wikipedia, there's only one side here that is organizing, and spending, to skew content.

If they're serious enough about their goals here, they could always publish a few RSP pieces speculating links between Iran/China and pro-Palestine editing, to make it more palatable.

[eppur si muove]

I would have hoped that Nishidani and any other accused be informed of what organisation it is making the complaint.

[orangepi]

Would it help with the "standing" concerns if I filed the complaint?

For the avoidance of doubt: it isn't me, and I'm not volunteering. Wikipedia will be replaced by LLMs before I have time to come back. And Netanyahu is a butcher; I don't want to even look like I am on his side. But there is a case, and attacking everyone who tries to bring it is a bad look.

[nableezy]

I would have hoped that Nishidani and any other accused be informed of what organisation it is making the complaint.

My guess is JCPA.

[Randy from Boise]

I would have hoped that Nishidani and any other accused be informed of what organisation it is making the complaint.

My guess is JCPA.

Help us out with the acronyms a little, please. Sixty seconds later, my guess is Jewish Council for Public Affairs.

Wikipedia will be replaced by LLMs before I have time to come back.

Not even a fucking clue...

t

[nableezy]

I would have hoped that Nishidani and any other accused be informed of what organisation it is making the complaint.

My guess is JCPA.

Help us out with the acronyms a little, please. Sixty seconds later, my guess is Jewish Council for Public Affairs.

Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (T-H-L)

[rnu]

[...]

Wikipedia will be replaced by LLMs before I have time to come back.

Not even a fucking clue...

t

Large language models, e.g. OpenAI's GPT or google's BERT.

[orangepi]

Wikipedia will be replaced by LLMs before I have time to come back.

Not even a fucking clue...

t

"Large Language Models" - previously at viewtopic.php?f=8&t=13345

[utbc]

LLMs are old news, everyone's moved on to LMMs already.

[utbc]

I think that people's concerns will be alleviated when they see which organisation that is.

Médecins Sans Frontières just became a juge favourite.

[nableezy]

I think that people's concerns will be alleviated when they see which organisation that is.

Médecins Sans Frontières just became a juge favourite.

The Hamas front? Nah.

[rnu]

I think that people's concerns will be alleviated when they see which organisation that is.

Médecins Sans Frontières just became a juge favourite.

If only there had been a way to prevent all the speculation ...

The Committee has told them that they should disclose the organisation. I don't want to make promises, but I think that people's concerns will be alleviated when they see which organisation that is (or at least the wider Community will understand why we didn't dismiss them completely).
I personally highly doubt that this is a reincarnation of that website. Committee members have fought to address lobbying/canvassing issues in this subject area and it would be inaccurate to say that we are undoing the WMF's work or abandoning editors to be harassed. Sdrqaz (talk) 14:07, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Have they learned nothing about how bad actors on Wikipedia treat the word "should"?

[greenday61892]

Why does this current ArbCom seem to think AGF means "enforce fucking nothing?" If it's to be disclosed, DISCLOSE IT YOURSELVES

[nableezy]

Why does this current ArbCom seem to think AGF means "enforce fucking nothing?" If it's to be disclosed, DISCLOSE IT YOURSELVES

Directive one, though shall not share private communications even if they should be shared. Their recourse, by the rules, would be to block the account if they refuse to disclose.

[rnu]

Why does this current ArbCom seem to think AGF means "enforce fucking nothing?" If it's to be disclosed, DISCLOSE IT YOURSELVES

Directive one, though shall not share private communications even if they should be shared. Their recourse, by the rules, would be to block the account if they refuse to disclose.

They could and should have made it a condition for posting in the first place.

[Xiphoid Process]

Why does this current ArbCom seem to think AGF means "enforce fucking nothing?" If it's to be disclosed, DISCLOSE IT YOURSELVES

Directive one, though shall not share private communications even if they should be shared. Their recourse, by the rules, would be to block the account if they refuse to disclose.

They could and should have made it a condition for posting in the first place.

Yes. This is yet another example of Arbcom exercising poor judgment and misunderstanding its own role.

The only correct answer to the email they received (to the extent it has been accurately described) would have been "This does not involve private information, so it needs to be discussed on-wiki." That's it. Finished. Done. If the "organization" isn't happy with that answer, they can pound sand. Arbcom is not the manager of Wikipedia and nobody has any inherent right to appeal if they don't like the community's answer. Arbcom has a narrowly-defined role in serving as the final venue for intractable on-wiki disputes, for issues that cannot be discussed on-wiki because of NPI, and for issues of admin/bureaucrat misconduct. But this does not fall into any of those categories, so Arbcom has no jurisdiction, full stop.

I don't blame people outside of Wikipedia for failing to understand this, because it is a genuinely weird structure and for 99% of the organizations out there "contact the manager" is actually a legitimate strategy. But I do blame Arbcom for enabling this behavior because of an apparent lack of understanding of what their job actually is.

[Konveyor Belt]

The account's EC permissions have been revoked. Good job by ARBCOM as usual on this one.