Fram's RFA

[Carcharoth]

Note: This post and several others were merged from the main Fram topic.

Carcharoth is not the author of this topic, and did not create its title. --Zoloft


Has there been any decision yet on whether to have this thread continue for the upcoming RfA by Fram, or should a new one be started?

As a taster of what is to come:

GeoSwan's first comment and a second attempt. Both times removed by Fram with the edit summaries: "Undid revision 917785279 by Geo Swan (talk) Now try it without the personal attacks?" and "Undid revision 917794455 by Geo Swan (talk) Unwanted advice".

See also associated (minor) discussion at Fram's user talk page.

[Jans Hammer]

Has there been any decision yet on whether to have this thread continue for the upcoming RfA by Fram, or should a new one be started?

As a taster of what is to come:

GeoSwan's first comment and a second attempt. Both times removed by Fram with the edit summaries: "Undid revision 917785279 by Geo Swan (talk) Now try it without the personal attacks?" and "Undid revision 917794455 by Geo Swan (talk) Unwanted advice".

See also associated (minor) discussion at Fram's user talk page.

I don't care much, in fact not at all, for your coaching, offering guidance and the general circling of Admin waggons.

[Alex Shih]

There should be a new thread, since the new RfA itself is going to be a spectacle, almost certainly going to be the most participated RfA ever.

[Jans Hammer]

There should be a new thread, since the new RfA itself is going to be a spectacle, almost certainly going to be the most participated RfA ever.

[Carcharoth]

Has there been any decision yet on whether to have this thread continue for the upcoming RfA by Fram, or should a new one be started?

As a taster of what is to come:

GeoSwan's first comment and a second attempt. Both times removed by Fram with the edit summaries: "Undid revision 917785279 by Geo Swan (talk) Now try it without the personal attacks?" and "Undid revision 917794455 by Geo Swan (talk) Unwanted advice".

See also associated (minor) discussion at Fram's user talk page.

I don't care much, in fact not at all, for your coaching, offering guidance and the general circling of Admin waggons.

You have a good point there. I've been a bit uncomfortable with it myself. On the one hand I want Fram to be judged by the community as Fram, not Fram-with-5-co-nominations and lots of people making impassioned speeches. On the other hand, RfA can be a bear pit. Maybe it is time to step back and see what transpires (even if it may no longer be possible to discern the true 'feelings' of the community - that will be the task of the bureaucrats).

[C&B]

Usually, I don't like a mess of co-noms, as it does look as if the voters are being steam-rolled: unfair on the candidate, sure, but the multi-noms read like an instruction to the GroupThink, and the communitas is just there to RubberStamp.

It is in Fram's case, though, I make the exception. A massive quantity of colleagues *who have actually worked with him* and can understand what they have been through because *all admins encounter the same spark to snarkiness every day* is exactly what he needs.

Remember, this is not a RfA (Request for Adminship); this is a RfA (Refute fucking trust And safety)

[Poetlister]

There should be a new thread, since the new RfA itself is going to be a spectacle, almost certainly going to be the most participated RfA ever.

Yes, no doubt the new thread will have many hundreds of posts and this thread is gargantuan as it is (and still growing).

[Randy from Boise]

There should be a new thread, since the new RfA itself is going to be a spectacle, almost certainly going to be the most participated RfA ever.

Yes, no doubt the new thread will have many hundreds of posts and this thread is gargantuan as it is (and still growing).

3575th!!!

t

[Randy from Boise]

Wow, you've been editing wp for fifteen years and 83 percent of those edits are to mainspace. That's pretty impressive, or sad, depending on one's perspective.

Thanks, I think.

Welcome, Kim!

tim

[Jans Hammer]

There should be a new thread, since the new RfA itself is going to be a spectacle, almost certainly going to be the most participated RfA ever.

Yes, no doubt the new thread will have many hundreds of posts and this thread is gargantuan as it is (and still growing).

3575th!!!

t

Final c-nom has been added..... linkhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk ... hip/Fram_2[/link]

[Alex Shih]

Who is Chowbok

Yeah, as someone earlier mentioned, (with no disrespect intended; just the nature of enwiki), Chowbok's co-nom looks really out of place there. Even Lourdes' co-nom looks quite out of place too, to a certain extent.

P.S. can the mod split Fram's RfA-related posts into a separate thread? Looks like Fram's RfA is about to go live in any minute.

[C&B]

Who is Chowbok

Yeah, as someone earlier mentioned, (with no disrespect intended; just the nature of enwiki), Chowbok's co-nom looks really out of place there. Even Lourdes' co-nom looks quite out of place too, to a certain extent.

P.S. can the mod split Fram's RfA-related posts into a separate thread? Looks like Fram's RfA is about to go live in any minute.

Uh-uh. Where is My Post That Alex Shih Quotes?!

[chowbok]

I'm sorry for not being important enough to co-nom.

[Vigilant]

I'm sorry for not being important enough to co-nom.

Well, I still love you.

[C&B]

I'm sorry for not being important enough to co-nom.

Is it that this is true

[Jans Hammer]

I'm sorry for not being important enough to co-nom.

Well, I still love you.

Interesting that Iridescent injected THEIR nomination right to the top. Can only imagine they believe it to be the most significant.

[MrErnie]

Fram's RFA is now live.

[Randy from Boise]

We are live...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... m_2#Oppose

Start time was 4:49 am PDT. It was 12-1 when I hopped in at 5:23, having been up for a little while already starting to compose a long oppose. Sitting 14-2 at the moment.

RfB

[Ritchie333]

I said I'd stay out of it, because if I wrote "Oppose - temperament falls below the standard expected of administrators" I'd probably get badgered and told to go look in a mirror.

[MrErnie]

I'm pretty disappointed in you Randy. Your oppose vote is weak. If all you've got after all this, and Fram's long history as an active admin, is one admittedly bad, quickly overturned block of GW and the opinion of Geo Swan, then I don't think anyone needs to care about your opinion.

[Vigilant]

Tim,

I couldn't possibly be more disgusted with you than I am at this moment.

[Randy from Boise]

Tim,

I couldn't possibly be more disgusted with you than I am at this moment.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't think I've ever indicated anything but my great distaste for him, have I?

Fram is the very definition of a bad, bully administrator. And he is a shitty editor to boot.

RfB

[Alex Shih]

To be fair, I was probably more infuriated by Fram's tone deaf and bizarre response to Fuzheado; I actually agree with the superior complex analogy, but I disagree with quoting Geo Swan, whom I think is really just a baiting troll that is precisely why Fram is needed as an admin sometimes.

[Jans Hammer]

Tim,

I couldn't possibly be more disgusted with you than I am at this moment.

Hopefully the feeling will quickly pass.

I think it's a fair call.

[Randy from Boise]

I'm pretty disappointed in you Randy. Your oppose vote is weak. If all you've got after all this, and Fram's long history as an active admin, is one admittedly bad, quickly overturned block of GW and the opinion of Geo Swan, then I don't think anyone needs to care about your opinion.

Hey, his minions have been writing that RFA for a week, I've been on the task for an hour.

What part of (more to follow) indicates to you that this is "all I've got" to you?

RfB

P.S. Spoiler alert: parts 2 and 3 will be the Blanter feud and his editing shittiness.

[Vigilant]

Tim,

I couldn't possibly be more disgusted with you than I am at this moment.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't think I've ever indicated anything but my great distaste for him, have I?

Fram is the very definition of a bad, bully administrator. And he is a shitty editor to boot.

RfB

It's about the process and you know it.

You're tacitly endorsing secret trials with secret evidence and predetermined outcomes in violation of existing policy and fundamental fairness.

Isn't making sure that the process is fair and equitable vastly more important than the individual outcome?

[Randy from Boise]

Tim,

I couldn't possibly be more disgusted with you than I am at this moment.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't think I've ever indicated anything but my great distaste for him, have I?

Fram is the very definition of a bad, bully administrator. And he is a shitty editor to boot.

RfB

It's about the process and you know it.

You're tacitly endorsing secret trials with secret evidence and predetermined outcomes in violation of existing policy and fundamental fairness.

I said my piece again secret trials and predetermined outcomes about 9600 times. That's done and hopefully done for good. Now we're in a new phase: a reconfirmation vote. There is no fantasy scenario of a pro forma reinstatement then a proper case.

So here we go.

RfB

[Vigilant]

Tim,

I couldn't possibly be more disgusted with you than I am at this moment.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't think I've ever indicated anything but my great distaste for him, have I?

Fram is the very definition of a bad, bully administrator. And he is a shitty editor to boot.

RfB

It's about the process and you know it.

You're tacitly endorsing secret trials with secret evidence and predetermined outcomes in violation of existing policy and fundamental fairness.

I said my piece again secret trials and predetermined outcomes about 9600 times. That's done and hopefully done for good. Now we're in a new phase: a reconfirmation vote. There is no fantasy scenario of a pro forma reinstatement then a proper case.

So here we go.

RfB

The desysop is fruit of the poisoned tree.

That you got your knife out for settling personal scores instead of advocating for an equitable process by utterly rebuking the demonstrably bad actors at Trust and Safety, the WMF, Laura/Maria, makes me think far less of you.

[TheElusiveClaw]

Fram's RFA is now live.

This really is the gift that keeps on giving.

I suspect he'll fail by a good margin: too many people pissed off by him, and too many lickspittles who will join in at the pile-on

[Osborne]

I said I'd stay out of it, because if I wrote "Oppose - temperament falls below the standard expected of administrators" I'd probably get badgered and told to go look in a mirror.

That's courageous.

The desysop is fruit of the poisoned tree.

As you sow shall you reap.

Tim, I couldn't possibly be more disgusted with you than I am at this moment.

Quit bullying Tim, look how that behavior discourages Ritchie.

[Alex Shih]

Any predictions for final tally? Considering Fram doesn't try to be hero and doesn't network, I am doubtful the support vote will exceed 325, with considerable more opposes.

I am calling 309-140-20... and the 'crat discussion will be yet again entertaining to watch, with some of them likely discounting votes that talks too much about T&S, ArbCom and process, rather than Fram as an admin

[Jans Hammer]

Any predictions for final tally? Considering Fram doesn't try to be hero and doesn't network, I am doubtful the support vote will exceed 325, with considerable more opposes.

I am calling 309-140-20... and the 'crat discussion will be yet again entertaining to watch, with some of them likely discounting votes that talks too much about T&S, ArbCom and process, rather than Fram as an admin

I cannot see Os exceeding 50. S 250+

[MrErnie]

I'm pretty disappointed in you Randy. Your oppose vote is weak. If all you've got after all this, and Fram's long history as an active admin, is one admittedly bad, quickly overturned block of GW and the opinion of Geo Swan, then I don't think anyone needs to care about your opinion.

Hey, his minions have been writing that RFA for a week, I've been on the task for an hour.

What part of (more to follow) indicates to you that this is "all I've got" to you?

RfB

P.S. Spoiler alert: parts 2 and 3 will be the Blanter feud and his editing shittiness.

Why didn’t you make your points during the Arb case? I can’t take you seriously on this.

[Randy from Boise]

The desysop is fruit of the poisoned tree.

That you got your knife out for settling personal scores instead of advocating for an equitable process by utterly rebuking the demonstrably bad actors at Trust and Safety, the WMF, Laura/Maria, makes me think far less of you.

There's plenty that is poisonous in Framgate, including especially Trust and Safety and their new micromanagement tool, LH the professional victim and her duplicity, Arbcom's decision to play along with the secret denouncement/secret trial process, and Fram's own behavior, which has been for a decade arrogant, mean-spirited, and combative.

A pox on all their houses.

There's no "poisoned tree discovery" involved here. Fram has been a well known Asshole, First Class since they invented the rank.

RfB

[Randy from Boise]

Why didn’t you make your points during the Arb case? I can’t take you seriously on this.

Oh, I'm serious. I'm really fucking serious.

I wasn't about to participate in that charade of a proceeding. The procedure was wrong, but they ended up getting it right.

This is a new chapter.

tim

[Randy from Boise]

I cannot see Os exceeding 50. S 250+

That might be right. That would put Fram at 83%+

I think it will land somewhere in the 70s, with very nearly 100 opposes.

Given the names behind him at the start, it's looking like a narrow pass. Let's call 302 - 96 (76%)

RfB

[Vigilant]

The desysop is fruit of the poisoned tree.

That you got your knife out for settling personal scores instead of advocating for an equitable process by utterly rebuking the demonstrably bad actors at Trust and Safety, the WMF, Laura/Maria, makes me think far less of you.

There's plenty that is poisonous in Framgate, including especially Trust and Safety and their new micromanagement tool, LH the professional victim and her duplicity, Arbcom's decision to play along with the secret denouncement/secret trial process, and Fram's own behavior, which has been for a decade arrogant, mean-spirited, and combative.

A pox on all their houses.

There's no "poisoned tree discovery" involved here. Fram has been a well known Asshole, First Class since they invented the rank.

RfB

Look upon your compatriots and despair.

Strong Oppose. Fram is temperamentally unsuited to be an admin. His behavior harassing other users has been over the top. He can edit the encyclopedia without the administrator toolkit and because of his temperament and past abuses of the system, he should never be granted the ability to exercise such power. I’ll not go into details, as we all know the tale. Montanabw(talk) 13:53, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Utter hypocrisy.

Oppose. It's interesting to look at previous versions of this RFA. The first edit summary reads "No discussion, no application of logic, no appeal to fairness or demand of actual evidence will change the position of those wanting to desysop". Yet the now-removed text is far from a logical discussion, but is a rabble rousing cry to send "a clear message to WMF and ArbCom". You've already sent that message and both the WMF and ArbCom have backed down; there's a clear victory for community governance. Now the message you need to send is not a rallying cry for a battle that's over, it's a message that you are indeed capable of competent community governance, and the way to do that is not to empower a long-term abuser just to spite perceived authority figures. If you want to believe that there no evidence for any of this, despite ample testimony of many and a 70 page report, then no discussion, no application of logic, no appeal to fairness will change your position. While I'm here, I would like to direct Fram's most infamous two word quote to ArbCom, who in a stunning display of moral cowardice has dropped this mess in our lap. Were there any justice in this world, all nine of them would be forced to live in the same house as Fram for an entire season of Big Brother. Gamaliel (talk) 13:54, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Look who you're in bed with.

[Carcharoth]

The opposes are coming in quite fast, but difficult to know when they will peter out. Very difficult to call it, but if the opposes go above 100 it will be difficult. I think it will almost certainly go to a 'crat chat. It is a low blow for the opposes to refer to the draft that Fram rewrote and to refer to the trolling on his talk page, but that is the sort of thing you would expect here.

[Randy from Boise]

Look upon your compatriots and despair.

Strong Oppose. Fram is temperamentally unsuited to be an admin. His behavior harassing other users has been over the top. He can edit the encyclopedia without the administrator toolkit and because of his temperament and past abuses of the system, he should never be granted the ability to exercise such power. I’ll not go into details, as we all know the tale. Montanabw(talk) 13:53, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Utter hypocrisy.

Oppose. It's interesting to look at previous versions of this RFA. The first edit summary reads "No discussion, no application of logic, no appeal to fairness or demand of actual evidence will change the position of those wanting to desysop". Yet the now-removed text is far from a logical discussion, but is a rabble rousing cry to send "a clear message to WMF and ArbCom". You've already sent that message and both the WMF and ArbCom have backed down; there's a clear victory for community governance. Now the message you need to send is not a rallying cry for a battle that's over, it's a message that you are indeed capable of competent community governance, and the way to do that is not to empower a long-term abuser just to spite perceived authority figures. If you want to believe that there no evidence for any of this, despite ample testimony of many and a 70 page report, then no discussion, no application of logic, no appeal to fairness will change your position. While I'm here, I would like to direct Fram's most infamous two word quote to ArbCom, who in a stunning display of moral cowardice has dropped this mess in our lap. Were there any justice in this world, all nine of them would be forced to live in the same house as Fram for an entire season of Big Brother. Gamaliel (talk) 13:54, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Look who you're in bed with.

Hmmmmmm, how to respond with a pithy aphorism?

"Politics makes strange bedfellows," perhaps?

RfB

[Jans Hammer]

I cannot see Os exceeding 50. S 250+

That might be right. That would put Fram at 83%+

I think it will land somewhere in the 70s, with very nearly 100 opposes.

Given the names behind him at the start, it's looking like a narrow pass. Let's call 302 - 96 (76%)

RfB

Since above, I would say more opposes recorded than I expected. We'll have more clue when the U.S. returns home tonight

[Randy from Boise]

The opposes are coming in quite fast, but difficult to know when they will peter out. Very difficult to call it, but if the opposes go above 100 it will be difficult. I think it will almost certainly go to a 'crat chat. It is a low blow for the opposes to refer to the draft that Fram rewrote and to refer to the trolling on his talk page, but that is the sort of thing you would expect here.

I don't see this falling below 60% or exceeding 85%.

Usually the pattern is that contested nominations start with strong support, then "bad stuff" starts to be uncovered and the number chips down down down down...

Here, I think these votes will be more akin to a series of samples of a fixed population. We all have our views of Fram and Framgate by now. If Fram passes, it will be because of disgust with Framgate (the Vigilant defense) rather than because of Fram's good deeds and the goodwill generated... In an ordinary test of the question, stripping aside Framgate, he would not pass. Then again, without Framgate he would not need to even run for election, because he already had tools for life, or until the (probably inevitable) detooling two or three years hence...

I think 300+ supports and 100+ opposes are both fairly likely outcomes. Whether it is a straight pass or a decision by the Crats will be the interesting outcome. If it goes to the Crats, I don't know how it ends, because the supports here are apt to be shallowly argued.

RfB

[Vigilant]

Look upon your compatriots and despair.

Strong Oppose. Fram is temperamentally unsuited to be an admin. His behavior harassing other users has been over the top. He can edit the encyclopedia without the administrator toolkit and because of his temperament and past abuses of the system, he should never be granted the ability to exercise such power. I’ll not go into details, as we all know the tale. Montanabw(talk) 13:53, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Utter hypocrisy.

Oppose. It's interesting to look at previous versions of this RFA. The first edit summary reads "No discussion, no application of logic, no appeal to fairness or demand of actual evidence will change the position of those wanting to desysop". Yet the now-removed text is far from a logical discussion, but is a rabble rousing cry to send "a clear message to WMF and ArbCom". You've already sent that message and both the WMF and ArbCom have backed down; there's a clear victory for community governance. Now the message you need to send is not a rallying cry for a battle that's over, it's a message that you are indeed capable of competent community governance, and the way to do that is not to empower a long-term abuser just to spite perceived authority figures. If you want to believe that there no evidence for any of this, despite ample testimony of many and a 70 page report, then no discussion, no application of logic, no appeal to fairness will change your position. While I'm here, I would like to direct Fram's most infamous two word quote to ArbCom, who in a stunning display of moral cowardice has dropped this mess in our lap. Were there any justice in this world, all nine of them would be forced to live in the same house as Fram for an entire season of Big Brother. Gamaliel (talk) 13:54, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Look who you're in bed with.

Hmmmmmm, how to respond with a pithy aphorism?

"Politics makes strange bedfellows," perhaps?

RfB

Lie down with dogs, wake up with fleas?
Birds of a feather flock together?
A man is judged by the company he keeps?


This is explained if you see this as 'politics' rather than an assessment of fitness or a defense of due process.
Thanks for clearly delineating your motives.

[Randy from Boise]

Look upon your compatriots and despair.

Strong Oppose. Fram is temperamentally unsuited to be an admin. His behavior harassing other users has been over the top. He can edit the encyclopedia without the administrator toolkit and because of his temperament and past abuses of the system, he should never be granted the ability to exercise such power. I’ll not go into details, as we all know the tale. Montanabw(talk) 13:53, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Utter hypocrisy.

Oppose. It's interesting to look at previous versions of this RFA. The first edit summary reads "No discussion, no application of logic, no appeal to fairness or demand of actual evidence will change the position of those wanting to desysop". Yet the now-removed text is far from a logical discussion, but is a rabble rousing cry to send "a clear message to WMF and ArbCom". You've already sent that message and both the WMF and ArbCom have backed down; there's a clear victory for community governance. Now the message you need to send is not a rallying cry for a battle that's over, it's a message that you are indeed capable of competent community governance, and the way to do that is not to empower a long-term abuser just to spite perceived authority figures. If you want to believe that there no evidence for any of this, despite ample testimony of many and a 70 page report, then no discussion, no application of logic, no appeal to fairness will change your position. While I'm here, I would like to direct Fram's most infamous two word quote to ArbCom, who in a stunning display of moral cowardice has dropped this mess in our lap. Were there any justice in this world, all nine of them would be forced to live in the same house as Fram for an entire season of Big Brother. Gamaliel (talk) 13:54, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Look who you're in bed with.

Hmmmmmm, how to respond with a pithy aphorism?

"Politics makes strange bedfellows," perhaps?

RfB

Lie down with dogs, wake up with fleas?
Birds of a feather flock together?
A man is judged by the company he keeps?

Those are also aphorisms, but don't seem quite as on point. After all, I keep my company with the flea-laden flock here, do I not?

RfB

[Randy from Boise]

This is explained if you see this as 'politics' rather than an assessment of fitness or a defense of due process.
Thanks for clearly delineating your motives.

Oh, Vig, come on now. Are you really arguing that this is a legal proceeding?

It's a fucking plebiscite on a decision rendered by an elected body of a "case" fabricated by paid office staff using secret testimony they solicited from carefully targeted user groups.

What part of that says "judicial process" and not "politics" to you?

This is complete fucking politics and it always has been.

Question 1: T&S and their new self-appointed "authority over behavior." They were defeated.

Question 2: Is Fram worthy of being an administrator, revote. We shall see.

RfB

[Vigilant]

This is explained if you see this as 'politics' rather than an assessment of fitness or a defense of due process.
Thanks for clearly delineating your motives.

Oh, Vig, come on now. Are you really arguing that this is a legal proceeding?

It's a fucking plebiscite on a decision rendered by an elected body of a "case" fabricated by paid office staff using secret testimony they solicited from carefully targeted user groups.

What part of that says "judicial process" and not "politics" to you?

This is complete fucking politics and it always has been.

Question 1: T&S and their new self-appointed "authority over behavior." They were defeated.

Question 2: Is Fram worthy of being an administrator, revote. We shall see.

RfB

Dude.

You're so gross right now.
It must be all the time spent on Wikipedia that's done this to you.

There's a principle at stake here and you're seemingly content to let that die in order to get your Fram hate fuck on.
How is it that a strong Hasten the Day guy like me has a stronger moral compass about on-wiki due process than you do?!

You're honestly making me nauseous right now.

[10920]

The desysop is fruit of the poisoned tree.

That you got your knife out for settling personal scores instead of advocating for an equitable process by utterly rebuking the demonstrably bad actors at Trust and Safety, the WMF, Laura/Maria, makes me think far less of you.

There's plenty that is poisonous in Framgate, including especially Trust and Safety and their new micromanagement tool, LH the professional victim and her duplicity, Arbcom's decision to play along with the secret denouncement/secret trial process, and Fram's own behavior, which has been for a decade arrogant, mean-spirited, and combative.

A pox on all their houses.

There's no "poisoned tree discovery" involved here. Fram has been a well known Asshole, First Class since they invented the rank.

RfB

Look upon your compatriots and despair.

Strong Oppose. Fram is temperamentally unsuited to be an admin. His behavior harassing other users has been over the top. He can edit the encyclopedia without the administrator toolkit and because of his temperament and past abuses of the system, he should never be granted the ability to exercise such power. I’ll not go into details, as we all know the tale. Montanabw(talk) 13:53, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Utter hypocrisy.

Oppose. It's interesting to look at previous versions of this RFA. The first edit summary reads "No discussion, no application of logic, no appeal to fairness or demand of actual evidence will change the position of those wanting to desysop". Yet the now-removed text is far from a logical discussion, but is a rabble rousing cry to send "a clear message to WMF and ArbCom". You've already sent that message and both the WMF and ArbCom have backed down; there's a clear victory for community governance. Now the message you need to send is not a rallying cry for a battle that's over, it's a message that you are indeed capable of competent community governance, and the way to do that is not to empower a long-term abuser just to spite perceived authority figures. If you want to believe that there no evidence for any of this, despite ample testimony of many and a 70 page report, then no discussion, no application of logic, no appeal to fairness will change your position. While I'm here, I would like to direct Fram's most infamous two word quote to ArbCom, who in a stunning display of moral cowardice has dropped this mess in our lap. Were there any justice in this world, all nine of them would be forced to live in the same house as Fram for an entire season of Big Brother. Gamaliel (talk) 13:54, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Look who you're in bed with.

Ah, the cabal got here quickly.

Gamaliel confirming he's an idiot.

You've already sent that message and both the WMF and ArbCom have backed down; there's a clear victory for community governance.

Uh, no. Not at all. The WMF banned Fram for over 3 months based on absolutely nothing, apparently, and then refused to overturn it or back down in the slightest. As far as we know, they will continue to do this as they please.

ArbCom refused to do anything because they're spineless.

[10920]

"Politics makes strange bedfellows," perhaps?

So this is political to you? Disappointing.

[Randy from Boise]

There's a principle at stake here and you're seemingly content to let that die in order to get your Fram hate fuck on.
How is it that a strong Hasten the Day guy like me has a stronger moral compass about on-wiki due process than you do?!

He has due process. We're having a reconfirmation election. I suppose a secret ballot and majority rule would be more democratic, but it is what it is.

Your argument is that since the entire proceeding against Fram was flawed, every question about him should be set aside by virtue of lack of fundamental fairness.

My argument is that a case was started by Arbcom to investigate Fram, as is their proper role. They were forced by the political necessity of the moment to run that case on a defective basis. They nevertheless observed the long-running behavior of Asshole, First Class Fram and jiggled the so-called evidence to fit the result.

It's axiomatic that the case was a clusterfuck. What we are deciding is whether the ultimate decision rendered by Arbcom was right or wrong.

I'm all for getting rid of every Administrator who attains the rank Asshole, First Class, myself. That is one way to avoid Hastening The Day..

RfB

[Jans Hammer]

There's a principle at stake here and you're seemingly content to let that die in order to get your Fram hate fuck on.
How is it that a strong Hasten the Day guy like me has a stronger moral compass about on-wiki due process than you do?!

He has due process. We're having a reconfirmation election. I suppose a secret ballot and majority rule would be more democratic, but it is what it is.

Your argument is that since the entire proceeding against Fram was flawed, every question about him should be set aside by virtue of lack of fundamental fairness.

My argument is that a case was started by Arbcom to investigate Fram, as is their proper role. They were forced by the political necessity of the moment to run that case on a defective basis. They nevertheless observed the long-running behavior of Asshole, First Class Fram and jiggled the so-called evidence to fit the result.

It's axiomatic that the case was a clusterfuck. What we are deciding is whether the ultimate decision rendered by Arbcom was right or wrong.

I'm all for getting rid of every Administrator who attains the rank Asshole, First Class, myself.

RfB

and as far as I'm concerned through any means.....

[Randy from Boise]

and as far as I'm concerned through any means.....

I was actually going to the Malcolm X quotebook myself in my first draft. I don't totally agree with the sentiment though.

This is a case of right result, wrong process.

RfB