The Wikipedia Critics' Forum
https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/
Would someone be kind enough to explain the inconsistency of how one can still be sanctioned when the findings that these sanctions are based on do not pass? Especially if one of your colleagues insists that that a single statement isn't sufficient evidence? The fact that you're having problems notifying the accused editors almost two months after the fact would be somewhat farcical in a Keystone Kops sorta way were it not for the irrational insistence on holding those people accountable for essentially meaningless thought-crimes. Add to that the fact that if one person proposed something the general public regarded as ridiculous and political, they should expect ridiculous and political discourse to follow. Sorry, people get offended...it's a fact of life. But if they don't want to get burned they shouldn't touch the oven...and they sure as hell shouldn't be starting fires. But to start a fire and hold other people accountable for the consequences...it's quite frankly stupid. Years ago there was a big blowup over whether Armenia was in Europe or Asia...and it became bitter and offensive...but every time the debate started, it was intentional provocation. This entire imbroglio started likely for similar reasons...it was a political statement and a provocative one at that. The fact that this entire process is inconsistent and lacking credibility because of the flaws is alarming. If it were up to me, close it off move on. I received a notice inviting me to comment, I commented...I pointed to policy and gave my opinion. I don't care if you disagree with my opinion or if someone's feelings were hurt. Too bad. I could care less about someone nursing wounds and saying "you're bad" because no one wants to let them have their way. I'm shocked you all have wasted two months over what I consider bullshit. And it's bullshit I forgot about two months ago. I apologize if you see that I have contempt for this process and this nonsense. Seriously, if you can't see how much of a waste of time this is, I feel bad for you...but that's not my problem...and two months later, I'd appreciate it if you'd move on like most of us already have and not waste my time any further with this nonsense. I have better things to do, and have been doing them, until yesterday when someone decided to notify me two months later. --ColonelHenry (talk) 02:59, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
It is quite ridiculous for a finding-of-fact to fail and a topic-ban to pass, I agree. But his "I didn't know nuttin about no case!" shtick is equally so. He was notified on the 15th; he manually archived most of his talk page on the 28th. Around the next time my landlord usually sends the rent reminder, I'll make sure just let the mail gather for that week and then toss it out unseen. Surely she'll understand.Vigilant wrote:Hard to argue with this guy.
I'm sure you're feeling ashamed and chagrined right now.Tarc, your conduct in this matter has been reprehensible. Adding yet another personal attack (the sarcastic remark 'genius') is not helpful.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 12:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Maybe Jimbo is like Tarc, and will someday reveal that he has been conducting a "social experiment" by pretending to be a douchebag for the last 40 years.Vigilant wrote:Ooooh, tarc getting spanked by der JimmmboI'm sure you're feeling ashamed and chagrined right now.Tarc, your conduct in this matter has been reprehensible. Adding yet another personal attack (the sarcastic remark 'genius') is not helpful.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 12:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
The long con is the best con.Mancunium wrote:Maybe Jimbo is like Tarc, and will someday reveal that he has been conducting a "social experiment" by pretending to be a douchebag for the last 40 years.Vigilant wrote:Ooooh, tarc getting spanked by der JimmmboI'm sure you're feeling ashamed and chagrined right now.Tarc, your conduct in this matter has been reprehensible. Adding yet another personal attack (the sarcastic remark 'genius') is not helpful.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 12:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
You mean, if Jimbo suddenly came out and said, "Guess what! I always intended Wikipedia as a troll. I never imagined that people would take it as seriously as they did. Guys, why don't you find a life? It was intended as a JOKE to indirectly attract people to BOMIS. LOL!"Vigilant wrote:The long con is the best con.Mancunium wrote:Maybe Jimbo is like Tarc, and will someday reveal that he has been conducting a "social experiment" by pretending to be a douchebag for the last 40 years.Vigilant wrote:Ooooh, tarc getting spanked by der JimmmboI'm sure you're feeling ashamed and chagrined right now.Tarc, your conduct in this matter has been reprehensible. Adding yet another personal attack (the sarcastic remark 'genius') is not helpful.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 12:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Jimbo was just sipping one last drop of Josh Gorand's kool-aid here, I'll give him a pass for now.Vigilant wrote:Ooooh, tarc getting spanked by der JimmmboI'm sure you're feeling ashamed and chagrined right now.Tarc, your conduct in this matter has been reprehensible. Adding yet another personal attack (the sarcastic remark 'genius') is not helpful.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 12:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
That's what you get for committing Lèse_majesté (T-H-L).Tarc wrote:Jimbo was just sipping one last drop of Josh Gorand's kool-aid here, I'll give him a pass for now.Vigilant wrote:Ooooh, tarc getting spanked by der JimmmboI'm sure you're feeling ashamed and chagrined right now.Tarc, your conduct in this matter has been reprehensible. Adding yet another personal attack (the sarcastic remark 'genius') is not helpful.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 12:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
But onto far more amusing things; flip-flopper #1 has stepped to the plate, and his name is NewYorkBrad.
"We are not amused"Vigilant wrote:That's what you get for committing Lèse_majesté (T-H-L).Tarc wrote:But onto far more amusing things; flip-flopper #1 has stepped to the plate, and his name is NewYorkBrad.
Tarc wrote:Jimbo was just sipping one last drop of Josh Gorand's kool-aid here, I'll give him a pass for now.Vigilant wrote:Ooooh, tarc getting spanked by der JimmmboI'm sure you're feeling ashamed and chagrined right now.Tarc, your conduct in this matter has been reprehensible. Adding yet another personal attack (the sarcastic remark 'genius') is not helpful.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 12:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
But onto far more amusing things; flip-flopper #1 has stepped to the plate, and his name is NewYorkBrad.
Newyorkbrad wrote: ...in a single-buttock fashion
He needs to be rogered with a prize winning leek.Wer900 wrote:None of this matters.
David Gerard needs an Okeyes-style defrocking.
That's a maneuver known as 'The Welsh Hurrah.'Vigilant wrote:He needs to be rogered with a prize winning leek.Wer900 wrote:None of this matters.
David Gerard needs an Okeyes-style defrocking.
Why is this site's name removed from his speech? Is WP:BADSITES de facto policy now?Tarc wrote:Jimbo was just sipping one last drop of Josh Gorand's kool-aid here, I'll give him a pass for now.Vigilant wrote:Ooooh, tarc getting spanked by der JimmmboI'm sure you're feeling ashamed and chagrined right now.Tarc, your conduct in this matter has been reprehensible. Adding yet another personal attack (the sarcastic remark 'genius') is not helpful.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 12:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
But onto far more amusing things; flip-flopper #1 has stepped to the plate, and his name is NewYorkBrad.
Silence, knave! The Great Hebrew Pumpkin speaketh, however incoherently!The Joy wrote:Why is this site's name removed from his speech? Is WP:BADSITES de facto policy now?Tarc wrote:But onto far more amusing things; flip-flopper #1 has stepped to the plate, and his name is NewYorkBrad.
EricBarbour wrote:Silence, knave! The Great Hebrew Pumpkin speaketh, however incoherently!The Joy wrote:Why is this site's name removed from his speech? Is WP:BADSITES de facto policy now?Tarc wrote:But onto far more amusing things; flip-flopper #1 has stepped to the plate, and his name is NewYorkBrad.
So it's worse to say bad things if you don't mean them, than if you do mean them?Tarc wrote:Jimbo was just sipping one last drop of Josh Gorand's kool-aid here, I'll give him a pass for now.Vigilant wrote:Ooooh, tarc getting spanked by der JimmmboI'm sure you're feeling ashamed and chagrined right now.Tarc, your conduct in this matter has been reprehensible. Adding yet another personal attack (the sarcastic remark 'genius') is not helpful.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 12:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
But onto far more amusing things; flip-flopper #1 has stepped to the plate, and his name is NewYorkBrad.
EricBarbour wrote:Silence, knave! The Great Hebrew Pumpkin speaketh, however incoherently!The Joy wrote:Why is this site's name removed from his speech? Is WP:BADSITES de facto policy now?Tarc wrote:But onto far more amusing things; flip-flopper #1 has stepped to the plate, and his name is NewYorkBrad.
A guy honking his car horn to avert a wreck or because he is legitimately pissed off at the bad driving of others is one thing. A dolt laying on his horn merely because he likes its sound is quite another. One is excusable, the other needs to be ticketed for noise pollution....Silent Editor wrote:So it's worse to say bad things if you don't mean them, than if you do mean them?Tarc wrote:Jimbo was just sipping one last drop of Josh Gorand's kool-aid here, I'll give him a pass for now.Vigilant wrote:Ooooh, tarc getting spanked by der JimmmboI'm sure you're feeling ashamed and chagrined right now.Tarc, your conduct in this matter has been reprehensible. Adding yet another personal attack (the sarcastic remark 'genius') is not helpful.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 12:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
But onto far more amusing things; flip-flopper #1 has stepped to the plate, and his name is NewYorkBrad.
But if there is no bad driving at all?Randy from Boise wrote:A guy honking his car horn to avert a wreck or because he is legitimately pissed off at the bad driving of others is one thing. A dolt laying on his horn merely because he likes its sound is quite another. One is excusable, the other needs to be ticketed for noise pollution....Silent Editor wrote:So it's worse to say bad things if you don't mean them, than if you do mean them?Tarc wrote:Jimbo was just sipping one last drop of Josh Gorand's kool-aid here, I'll give him a pass for now.Vigilant wrote:Ooooh, tarc getting spanked by der JimmmboI'm sure you're feeling ashamed and chagrined right now.Tarc, your conduct in this matter has been reprehensible. Adding yet another personal attack (the sarcastic remark 'genius') is not helpful.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 12:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
But onto far more amusing things; flip-flopper #1 has stepped to the plate, and his name is NewYorkBrad.
RfB
A last chance stab in the eye. I love it!David Gerard restricted in use of tools
14.2) David Gerard (talk · contribs) is indefinitely prohibited from using his administrator permissions (i) on pages relating to transgender people or issues and (i) in situations involving such pages. This restriction may be first appealed after six months have elapsed, and every six months thereafter.
Support:
Proposed, in addition to the above and not as an alternative. It is quite apparent that David's lack of objectivity about these issues has been problematic. It is therefore appropriate to formalise our expectation that he restrain himself to the role of "involved editor", and not take administrative actions, in future disputes that are similar to this one. AGK [•] 22:25, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
He richly deserves to be desysopped. But something has to be done, and this is at least better than a mere admonishment.Vigilant wrote:Ho ho!
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =576782824A last chance stab in the eye. I love it!David Gerard restricted in use of tools
14.2) David Gerard (talk · contribs) is indefinitely prohibited from using his administrator permissions (i) on pages relating to transgender people or issues and (i) in situations involving such pages. This restriction may be first appealed after six months have elapsed, and every six months thereafter.
Support:
Proposed, in addition to the above and not as an alternative. It is quite apparent that David's lack of objectivity about these issues has been problematic. It is therefore appropriate to formalise our expectation that he restrain himself to the role of "involved editor", and not take administrative actions, in future disputes that are similar to this one. AGK [•] 22:25, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Lèse-majesté
I unwatched this page a week ago, but my inner Pacinois just too much to ignore those new-fangled ping notifications.
Let's lay a few things out here. I made statements in this case which in my mind if I was an outside party listening to them, I would say "that's prejudiced to transgender people and their supporters. Knowing that the makeup of the Arb Committee (and honestly, the make up of the average Wikpedian) is generally of the free culture, small-l libertarian bent; the champions of individual liberty and the laissez-faire style of governing, I wanted to see if they had they ability to step out of that and actually recognize the fact that people do not have the right to discriminate against others, even if that contradicts the cherished "individual liberty" belief.
Obviously, they don't.
If I had kept my mouth shut...and quite honestly near the end of dealing with the vile behavior of Josh Gorand, I was sorely tempted to do so...then nothing would have happened here at all. The finding-of-fact would have failed, and the topic-ban would have failed. But I'd rather have a minority think this was "just trolling" than for a majority to think I was actually a bigot. Any day.
So now where are we at? A topic ban from a topic that I never edited before, and 2 petulant calls for a ban from all BLPs. The latter is especially rich, as I'm pretty sure Arbcom cannot simply make up punishments without a corresponding finding of fact to show just how I have harmed BLPs in general in the past.
What we can conclude from all this is twofold; a person is free to express prejudiced points-of-view in this project as long as they are expressed civilly. Also, the supposedly august body of the project is fundamentally incapable of judging the merits of a complex social topic such as transgenderism, or really any LGBT topic for that matter. Noses are buried too far into arcane Wiki alphabet soup of policies, guidelines, and rules. There was a blindness here to the simple question of "if a man expresses a wish to be the woman that she always believed she was inside, and reliable sources acknowledge that, should the Wikipedia follow suit?"
The answer should have been simple; "yes". That Arbcom missed this small but important tree within the forest is to their everlasting shame.
I am guilty of Lèse-majesté here, nothing more.
Your resignations should be on Jimbo's virtual desk in the morning. Tarc (talk) 22:22, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Fear not, lad, he's got plenty of admin sockpuppets.....Vigilant wrote:Gerard indefinitely restricted in his use of tools on transgender articles.
That effectively emasculates Gerard.
Fuck up again and it's into the lion's den, Davie boy.
Examples? I am not doubting your assertion but I would like more detail.EricBarbour wrote:Fear not, lad, he's got plenty of admin sockpuppets.....Vigilant wrote:Gerard indefinitely restricted in his use of tools on transgender articles.
That effectively emasculates Gerard.
Fuck up again and it's into the lion's den, Davie boy.
Sorry, not in public. Don't want him killing off any socks. Want them to fester.Wer900 wrote:Examples? I am not doubting your assertion but I would like more detail.
In passing, if at all. I do not think this is a "big deal". Gerard has survived far bigger attempts to rein him in.Regarding your book, do you think that this case is a chapter worth writing? It's already millions of bytes long, and even if there is much heat and little light it does seem like a semi-watershed moment (David Gerard restricted at least in name, Baseball Bugs restricted, two Arbitrators resigning). You might want to do a section on Wiki-PR, and given the involvement of the ArbCom in that, one cannot help but wonder if David Gerard is benefitting in some way. A connection would be unproven at this point, but worth investigating.
Still an absolutely pointless waste of time, in the final analysis.
Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute closed link
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
Hitmonchan (T-C-L) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed.
IFreedom1212 (T-C-L) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed.
Tarc (T-C-L) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed.
Josh Gorand (T-C-L) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed.
Baseball Bugs (T-C-L) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed. He is also topic banned from all pages (including biographies) related to leaks of classified information, broadly construed.
David Gerard (T-C-L) is admonished for acting in a manner incompatible with the community's expectations of administrators (see #David Gerard's use of tools).
David Gerard (T-C-L) is indefinitely prohibited from using his administrator permissions (i) on pages relating to transgender people or issues and (ii) in situations involving such pages. This restriction may be first appealed after six months have elapsed, and every six months thereafter.
The standard discretionary sanctions adopted in Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sexology for (among other things) "all articles dealing with transgender issues" remain in force. For the avoidance of doubt, these discretionary sanctions apply to any dispute regarding the proper article title, pronoun usage, or other manner of referring to any individual known to be or self-identifying as transgender, including but not limited to Chelsea/Bradley Manning. Any sanctions imposed should be logged at the Sexology case, not this one.
All editors, especially those whose behavior was subject to a finding in this case, are reminded to maintain decorum and civility when engaged in discussions on Wikipedia, and to avoid commentary that demeans any other person, intentionally or not.
For the Arbitration Committee, Rschen7754 6:31 pm, Today (UTC−7)
Indeed. I did give credit to you for the "Lèse-majesté" line though, when I first dropped it on NYB on my talk page.Vigilant wrote:Cheeky devil!
It was curious to see 2 (Fuchs, Courcelles) broach the idea of an all-encompassing BLP topic ban. I'm not well-versed in the history of Arbcom cases past, but popping ban proposals out of thin air with no supporting evidence of what one is claiming seems a bit novel.
-worthy is the next Arbcom election gonna be? Maybe I should run.you'd be ideally suitedTarc wrote:.. So how -worthy is the next Arbcom election gonna be? Maybe I should run.
I believe the 'hasten-the-day' crowd here would uniformly line up behind you, except for those you have offended. So, at least one vote.TungstenCarbide wrote:you'd be ideally suitedTarc wrote:.. So how -worthy is the next Arbcom election gonna be? Maybe I should run.
You really have to be careful with your usage of metaphors.Vigilant wrote:That effectively emasculates Gerard.
The arbitration pages, or this thread?Wer900 wrote:Please, Eric, transfer this to the book wiki as an original archive, even if you don't use it in your book. If any new developments happen this case could be oversighted; we cannot allow it to disappear from history, though.
Arbitration pages, undoubtedly. I am not fearful for the survival of this site; backups for this can be made elsewhere.EricBarbour wrote:The arbitration pages, or this thread?Wer900 wrote:Please, Eric, transfer this to the book wiki as an original archive, even if you don't use it in your book. If any new developments happen this case could be oversighted; we cannot allow it to disappear from history, though.
Okay. There are a few arb pages that I wish I had copies of.....Wer900 wrote:Arbitration pages, undoubtedly. I am not fearful for the survival of this site; backups for this can be made elsewhere.
I have backups at multiple locations, including this one, which is ultimately under a second set of hands' control. More would be nice.EricBarbour wrote:Okay. There are a few arb pages that I wish I had copies of.....Wer900 wrote:Arbitration pages, undoubtedly. I am not fearful for the survival of this site; backups for this can be made elsewhere.
You might mention to the sysops that keeping clean backups of the WO database, preferably in multiple hands, would be a really good idea.
What, do I have to list Gerard's numerous past abuses? Again??The Devil's Advocate wrote:Looks like someone is not pleased with Gerard's incredibly mild sanction and is banging on ArbCom's door.
Plus, why is he helping Gerard, when they were fighting on Foundation-l a few months ago? Bribery?Adam Cuerden (talk · contribs) - Er, well. I... think I could be a good admin, and believe I can be trusted with the power. But, er, I dunno, I'm a bit shy about even asking for the request, and try to avoid conflict beyond disagreements of opinion as much as possible - usually by attempting the whole "A civil word turns away wrath" method, and trying to negotiate and defuse situations. I guess that's probably a good thing... Ugh. I really hate writing about myself. Always seems rude to push yourself forward too much, and yet, I would like to help. Eh, I'll leave it up to the community to decide. Adam Cuerden talk 13:57, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
(I, of course, accept my own nomination.) Adam Cuerden talk 18:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Politics makes strange bedfellows, as they say. AC was one of the very involved Warriors For Truth, Righteousness, and the Fundamental Human Right to Be Able to Change a Gender and a Wikipedia Article with a News Conference™ and he's just looking out for a teammate...EricBarbour wrote:What, do I have to list Gerard's numerous past abuses? Again??The Devil's Advocate wrote:Looks like someone is not pleased with Gerard's incredibly mild sanction and is banging on ArbCom's door.
Ever looked at Adam Cuerden's RFA? It's comical.Plus, why is he helping Gerard, when they were fighting on Foundation-l a few months ago? Bribery?Adam Cuerden (talk · contribs) - Er, well. I... think I could be a good admin, and believe I can be trusted with the power. But, er, I dunno, I'm a bit shy about even asking for the request, and try to avoid conflict beyond disagreements of opinion as much as possible - usually by attempting the whole "A civil word turns away wrath" method, and trying to negotiate and defuse situations. I guess that's probably a good thing... Ugh. I really hate writing about myself. Always seems rude to push yourself forward too much, and yet, I would like to help. Eh, I'll leave it up to the community to decide. Adam Cuerden talk 13:57, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
(I, of course, accept my own nomination.) Adam Cuerden talk 18:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Hard to argue with this bit:Hex wrote:Phil Sandifer (T-C-L) has posted a long piece on his blog about the arbitration and Cla68, whom he comes down upon heavily. There's an update at the end from today, showing a nastygram he's just received from AGK for mentioning Cla's real life details.
Oh - I didn't know. He's quit the project. No wonder he wasn't worried about posting the AGK email. Well, there goes another one of the project's oldest remaining editors.
Phil Sandifer wrote:In its determination to avoid creating any top-down editorial structure, Wikipedia has instead repeatedly embraced a system of rules designed to eliminate thought from the decision making process as much as possible.
meh, I was an admin long before he made his first edit. He's always been a loud, self-rigorous jerk.Hex wrote:Well, there goes another one of the project's oldest remaining editors.
Ooooh... Sounds like we gotta baddass over here!UPDATE 10/23: So, I woke up to find this in my e-mail box:
Please contact the Arbitration Committee to explain why you have posted personal, non-public information about another contributor on your personal blog. This blog post has direct ramifications on the project, and may put you in gross violation of the project's norms and policies.
For the Arbitration Committee,
Anthony (AGK)
The reason why I did this should be straightforward and obvious: it's in the public interest to know that employees of the US Military are attempting to covertly influence the tone and direction of Wikipedia's coverage of Chelsea Manning. I am not attempting to assert some sort of conspiracy - I'm sure that Ainsworth was acting on his own initiative, and that it's merely that his values align with those of his employer. However this does not change the fact that he is employed by the institution currently imprisoning Chelsea Manning and denying her medically necessary treatment for gender dysphoria, and that he is hypocritically trying to influence Wikipedia's coverage of this from behind a pseudonym while decrying other people for their conflicts of interest.
That's AGK the Policy Theorist, Arbcom's finest legal mind. I looked at Phil Sandifer's Wikipedia talkpage and AGK was there commanding him specifically to use the Wikipedia email function to contact Arbcom, despite putting the email address right there too. I wonder A) why AGK wouldn't use the email function himself to contact Sandifer instead, and B) why the accentuation on using the email function as opposed to emailing directly.DanMurphy wrote:Ooooh... Sounds like we gotta baddass over here!UPDATE 10/23: So, I woke up to find this in my e-mail box:
Please contact the Arbitration Committee to explain why you have posted personal, non-public information about another contributor on your personal blog. This blog post has direct ramifications on the project, and may put you in gross violation of the project's norms and policies.
For the Arbitration Committee,
Anthony (AGK)
Yeah, that is pretty lame. Cla68 said naught but his opinion among the many editors, right? Sandifer is hamming it up with this "covertly influence" jazz.DanMurphy wrote:
On the other hand, Sandifer sounds like a paranoid little lefty git.
The reason why I did this should be straightforward and obvious: it's in the public interest to know that employees of the US Military are attempting to covertly influence the tone and direction of Wikipedia's coverage of Chelsea Manning.
ArbCom prefers ordering other people to do things they could easily do themselves (e.g. start an email conversation.) It's one of the less subtle ways in which they remind people of their status as the de facto government.Triptych wrote:I wonder A) why AGK wouldn't use the email function himself to contact Sandifer instead, and B) why the accentuation on using the email function as opposed to emailing directly.