Glorious Kudpung takes on another prominent Wikiwoman

[Midsize Jake]

Eric's just mad that his posse wasn't up to the job of keeping him unbanned.

Sometimes posses are no better than Arbcoms, at least in terms of general reliability.

[Poetlister]

Every Arbitration Committee is as bad as every other, just in different ways.

Ain't that the truth. I'm sure even the Arbs would agree with that.

Any arb or ex-Arb will tell you that things are a lot better when they're on the committee than when they're off. Some might be modest enough to say that things weren't perfect despite their presence.

[Poetlister]

"I don't know how many commenters/Arbs here have been at the receiving end of an Arbcom case and know what it feels like ..."

It is, understandably, rare for an ex-Arb to be up in front of Arbcom. It can happen though; Fred Bauder was a notable recent case.

[Eric Corbett]

Eric's just mad that his posse wasn't up to the job of keeping him unbanned.

Sometimes posses are no better than Arbcoms, at least in terms of general reliability.

... and I'm not the one that's mad.

[Vigilant]

Eric's just mad that his posse wasn't up to the job of keeping him unbanned.

Sometimes posses are no better than Arbcoms, at least in terms of general reliability.

... and I'm not the one that's mad.

Oh yes you are and in more ways than one.

[Guerillero]

Every Arbitration Committee is as bad as every other, just in different ways.

Ain't that the truth. I'm sure even the Arbs would agree with that.

Any arb or ex-Arb will tell you that things are a lot better when they're on the committee than when they're off. Some might be modest enough to say that things weren't perfect despite their presence.

I will say that the time I was on the committee was a rough time for ArbCom and a number of sessions since I left the committee have been more productive than when I was there

[Randy from Boise]

Every Arbitration Committee is as bad as every other, just in different ways.

I do believe we have identified Eric's Rule of Wikipedia No. 1.

RfB

[Vigilant]

He did all these things that admins aren't supposed to...

Guess we'll let him off anyway...

I'm not convinced gender is really the deciding factor here. More likely ArbCom just don't want to desysop three times in a row because it'd make them look like Hanging judges. That's why they're scrambling around looking for reasons to let Kudpung off the hook. It hasn't escaped anyone's attention that remedies like "12 month admin probation" weren't considered during BrownHairedGirl's trial. I strongly suspect that, if Kudpung's case had been opened first and BHG's last, they would have been more inclined for harshness towards Kudpung and leniency towards BHG. It's still early in the voting, but if it ends up with Kudpung remaining free to slime around making vague yet forceful threats against people and nuking IP editors for shits and giggles, while BHG lost her bit for nothing more than chronic grouchiness, I will be disappointed but not surprised. Reyk YO! 06:26, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

If only there were some sort of requirement for actual experience in jurisprudence prior to participating on ARBCOM.

This, "Let's just work it our on the fly..." approach yields severely substandard results.

[Jans Hammer]

My guess is that he will resent being placed on probation almost as much, if not more, than being desysoped. It is entirely against his nature, remembering his academic career telling other people who is in charge. It's a tightrope he will find difficulty walking.

[Jans Hammer]

LOL at Lourdes.
Reyk, request you to strike your statement –

"Kudpung remaining free to slime around making vague yet forceful threats against people and nuking IP editors for shits and giggles".

CodeLyoko, Miniapolis, your eyes needed here. Thanks, Lourdes 12:25 pm, Today (UTC+0)

But they used quotes to refer to the accurate but apparently offending text!

[Poetlister]

To ask for for experience in jurisprudence before joining ARBCOM is as pointless as asking for experience in writing encyclopaedia articles before editing Wikipedia, or even for evidence of subject knowledge relevant to the article.

[Randy from Boise]

Here's your speed link to the Kudpunk Proposed Decision page...

link

RfB

[Randy from Boise]

LOL at Lourdes.
Reyk, request you to strike your statement –

"Kudpung remaining free to slime around making vague yet forceful threats against people and nuking IP editors for shits and giggles".

CodeLyoko, Miniapolis, your eyes needed here. Thanks, Lourdes 12:25 pm, Today (UTC+0)

But they used quotes to refer to the accurate but apparently offending text!

Link that shit!

tim

[Randy from Boise]

The all important question of pulling tools sits 1 - 1.

Everything else is fluff, although even if he skates this time around, if he ends up at Arbcom again things will end poorly for him.

RfB

[Vigilant]

Community reminded

5) Arbitration is supposed to be the final step in the dispute resolution process. The community is reminded that attempting to have a community-wide discussion of problematic behavior early on can prevent unnecessary escalations.

Yet one of the findings of fact directly contradicts this...

Previous attempts at resolution (2)

4.1) Multiple users have individually counseled Kudpung about his behavior in messages on his talk page or in the context of other discussions [20] (2018), [21](2018), [22] (2018), [23] (2020). There were also several attempts to address his behaviour on public noticeboards, including 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, in addition to the incident report on the administrator's noticeboard that led to this case.

* He's an admin.
* He bans people from his talk page.
* He refuses to participate in any discussion about his behavior, only relenting during this ARBCOM debacle when it became apparent he was going to lose.
* He routinely threatens people who stand up to him.
* ARBCOM is the only venue which can mete out punishment to admins.

I mean, you can tell he's contrite and open to taking on critiques in order to be a better admin...

Xxanthippe, what on earth has Wikimania 2020 got to to with this? I really think you've said more than enough during this case, your 'evidence' has been noted and comments are officially closed, and whichever way this case goes for me, you need to consider stepping back. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:02, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Super ready to behave better in the future...

Arbcom

Hi. Although the case is closed for further comment from the community, in view of the comments that keep arriving, I question why the drafted PD is allowed to take into consideration FoF that are totally unconnected and unrelated with the case and use them against me. I am probably not permitted to remind all concerned that Arbcom decsions are not allowed any appeals, and after taking weeks to come to a decision, I would have expected the drafters to at least be honest. What see here is partially deliberate bias and blatant distortion of the facts by the drafter(s). I don't mind complying with an Arbcom verdict, and what I do afterwards is up to me, but if it has to be a permanent and unappealble desysop, it should correctly reflect the facts. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:05, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

You people need to stop eating those lead paint chips...

[Jans Hammer]

LOL at Lourdes.
Reyk, request you to strike your statement –

"Kudpung remaining free to slime around making vague yet forceful threats against people and nuking IP editors for shits and giggles".

CodeLyoko, Miniapolis, your eyes needed here. Thanks, Lourdes 12:25 pm, Today (UTC+0)

But they used quotes to refer to the accurate but apparently offending text!

Link that shit!

tim

There is some decent momentum building on the Talk Page for tools removal. Only Lourdes holding the support end up. No doubt Buffs will turn up soon with a line by line rebuttal. link

[Vigilant]

Once again, Nick is being too sane for en.wp

Statement by Nick

I must fully agree with the comments above which express a great deal of concern over the ways in which BrownHairedGirl and Kudpung are being treated differently by the Committee. I'm especially confused given the damning findings which have been presented - threats of taking actions against those he perceives himself to be in dispute with, threats of investigations and implying subtly that he's quite happy to engage in stalking behaviour, which are, of course, behavioural issues which we routinely deal with by lengthy or indefinite blocks where that user doesn't have the misfortune to hold advanced permissions. Their general administrator accountability is lamentable, even when taking into account the areas he works. The new page patrols and new page reviewing work does, sadly, result in many questions from inexperienced users and many allegations of untoward behaviour, but this can normally be dealt with without resorting to defensive or abusive tactics, making allegations of "trolling" and invoking the mythical "anti-admin brigade".

I am also greatly concerned that the Committee is failing to address Kudpung's failure to adequately involve themselves in the case; that sets an unfortunate precedent moving forward, telling other administrators that one way to retain adminship is to ignore the RFAR. I'd personally advocate a zero tolerance approach and would like to see 'failing to participate in a relevant arbitration case' as a legitimate ground for desysopping as part of an enhanced admin accountability policy, but that's just me.

There's more than enough here to see any ordinary user blocked for a very long time, Kudpung being an admin has got them out of trouble, whether they realise it or not, too many times and it really is about time that 'diplomatic immunity' was removed, not just for Kudpung, but for all of us.

-- Nick (talk) 15:46, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Sorry Nick, you're a lonely voice screaming into the void.

[Jans Hammer]

Comprehensive marker from AGK for removal of tools. Nice "easy out" for others to follow the example of

link

[Moral Hazard]

It seems like a reasonable decision, documenting the complaints and weird behavior, giving Kudpung (T-C-L) a chance to behave himself. I predicted that Casliber (T-C-L) would write a good & wise decision.

I agree with Nick (T-C-L) that Kudpung is likely unworthy of such a grace-period.

Unsurprisingly, Kudpung has returned to being Kudpung, making some of the Arbs appear like Senator Susan Collins (T-H-L), who claimed that President Donald Trump (T-H-L) had learned his lesson after the Impeachment of Donald Trump (T-H-L).

I predict a desysopping by May Day.

[Jans Hammer]

Is this indef block correct in all the circumstances? 1 final warning for 3 minor-ish bits of vandalism followed by K's block?

link

[lonza leggiera]

LOL at Lourdes.
Reyk, request you to strike your statement –

"Kudpung remaining free to slime around making vague yet forceful threats against people and nuking IP editors for shits and giggles".

CodeLyoko, Miniapolis, your eyes needed here. Thanks, Lourdes 12:25 pm, Today (UTC+0)

But they used quotes to refer to the accurate but apparently offending text!

Link that shit!

tim

Reyk's comments
Lourdes's request to strike
Minapolis takes it upon himself to carry out Lourdes's request to strike the offending text on Reyk's behalf.
Minapolis redacts his strikeout (so the offending text can no longer be seen on the talk page)

[Randy from Boise]

Even though everybody is jumping in and endorsing the extremely obvious, nobody is sticking their necks out to break the 1-1 tie in the desysop vote...

I'll bet their internal email list is raging.

RfB

link

[Eric Corbett]

Even though everybody is jumping in and endorsing the extremely obvious, nobody is sticking their necks out to break the 1-1 tie in the desysop vote...

I'll bet their internal email list is raging.

RfB

link

I doubt it.

The outcome is obvious: the usual admonishment plus this new unworkable probation thingie.

[Jans Hammer]

Even though everybody is jumping in and endorsing the extremely obvious, nobody is sticking their necks out to break the 1-1 tie in the desysop vote...

I'll bet their internal email list is raging.

RfB

link

I doubt it.

The outcome is obvious: the usual admonishment plus this new unworkable probation thingie.

Each individual Arb. should document their entire set of decisions / comments in a single or consecutive series of edits. Hanging back for someone else's "vote" on the important decisions is pretty spineless.

[Eric Corbett]

Each individual Arb. should document their entire set of decisions / comments in a single or consecutive series of edits. Hanging back for someone else's "vote" on the important decisions is pretty spineless.

It is, but there you go. Wikipedia gets what it deserves.

[Jans Hammer]

Well, well. 3 for removal of tools. Things are looking up. Casliber could swing - length of service is no good reason.

[Vigilant]

Unfortunately, I see no realistic or reasonable alternative. For a long time, our community has given administrators, in general, a wide degree of discretion about responding to concerns and criticisms about their administrative actions. Civility has been an even greater enduring problem. ADMINCOND has been a source of even greater scrutiny by the community as evident at RFA in recent years. Many have framed this case against other recent cases where a seeming pattern emerges. A long-time and prolific administrator has been given considerable leeway and allowed to carry on in a way not consistent with community expectations and norms. It then reaches a breaking a point. We do not expect administrators to be able to always self-identify when the line has been crossed, but we do expect them to take concerns about their actions seriously, especially when raised repeatedly, frequently in these cases by other trusted and experienced administrators. I understand Casliber's desire to acknowledge positive contributions and length of service, but at the same time we must recognize the long-term damage that has been caused by past committees by enacting WP:SUPERMARIO. Mkdw talk 18:42, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Ouch!

Little of Kudpung's conduct has directly related to his use of the tools. However that non-tool conduct does rise to a level of antagonism and disagreeableness that merits this remedy. More importantly, this hasn't been limited to a problematic interaction or single pain point—it's endemic to Kudpung's interactions and actions across the wiki. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 19:10, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Daaaaamnnnnnnn!

[Vigilant]

Wikipedia has been notifying me of attempts to access my account; probably related to the vandalism on this page. Change your passwords SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:32, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

(same here) Leaky caldron (talk) 18:23, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Is that the smell of desperation?

[Jans Hammer]

Wikipedia has been notifying me of attempts to access my account; probably related to the vandalism on this page. Change your passwords SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:32, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

(same here) Leaky caldron (talk) 18:23, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Is that the smell of desperation?

What would be the motive though? Any editors affected and likely as not others, would spot mischief almost immediately.

[Jans Hammer]

Unfortunately, I see no realistic or reasonable alternative. For a long time, our community has given administrators, in general, a wide degree of discretion about responding to concerns and criticisms about their administrative actions. Civility has been an even greater enduring problem. ADMINCOND has been a source of even greater scrutiny by the community as evident at RFA in recent years. Many have framed this case against other recent cases where a seeming pattern emerges. A long-time and prolific administrator has been given considerable leeway and allowed to carry on in a way not consistent with community expectations and norms. It then reaches a breaking a point. We do not expect administrators to be able to always self-identify when the line has been crossed, but we do expect them to take concerns about their actions seriously, especially when raised repeatedly, frequently in these cases by other trusted and experienced administrators. I understand Casliber's desire to acknowledge positive contributions and length of service, but at the same time we must recognize the long-term damage that has been caused by past committees by enacting WP:SUPERMARIO. Mkdw talk 18:42, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Ouch!

Little of Kudpung's conduct has directly related to his use of the tools. However that non-tool conduct does rise to a level of antagonism and disagreeableness that merits this remedy. More importantly, this hasn't been limited to a problematic interaction or single pain point—it's endemic to Kudpung's interactions and actions across the wiki. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 19:10, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Daaaaamnnnnnnn!

and quite difficult for other arbs to argue against. Any easy excuse to follow suit.

[pbe223]

What would be the motive though? Any editors affected and likely as not others, would spot mischief almost immediately.

Agreed. I think Sandy is right... Probably just Architect playing around.

[Vigilant]

If he gets desysoped, what's he going to call all of the people who loathe him?

The anti-asshole brigade?

[Jans Hammer]

Thanks to So Why's long-winded fence sitting exposition Kudpung desysopped (suspended remedy) has gone favorite - odds on now IMO.

[el84]

And if that happens, they won't accept any new case brought up against him in the next year, citing "haters".

EDIT: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =941015964

How are they not picking up on this shit? If it was anyone else they'd get banned for canvassing.

[Jans Hammer]

So t's all down to Jo Roe now..... Ironically, Xeno, who was forced to recuse, says they would have voted to remove.

[Osborne]

EDIT: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =941015964
How are they not picking up on this shit? If it was anyone else they'd get banned for canvassing.

That noob can't even post a permalink, but wants to be an admin...

[Vigilant]

WTAF is this?

Kudpung desysopped (suspended remedy)

1.1) For his failure to meet the conduct standards expected of an administrator, Kudpung's administrative user rights are removed. He may regain them at any time via a successful request for adminship.

In consideration of Kudpung's commitment to take on board feedback made during this case, and accept the committee's decision and apply it accordingly, this remedy will be suspended upon the closure of this case.

Kudpung is advised to fully comply with the Wikipedia:Administrators policy, including the conduct and accountability expectations. Kudpung is advised to remain civil, consider criticism objectively, and assume good faith. Specifically, Kudpung is advised to 1) refrain from indicating on-wiki that they are conducting investigations, and the like, into other editors; 2) refrain from suggesting editors critical of his actions are making personal attacks or engaging in sanctionable behaviour; and 3) refrain from unnecessarily prohibiting other editors from posting to their talk page.

If any editor feels that Kudpung's behaviour does not accord with the letter or the spirit of this remedy, they may file an amendment or contact the committee privately to request the remedy be enacted and Kudpung's administrative user rights be removed.

Kudpung may apply to have this remedy vacated one year from the closure of this case.

And Xeno having conversations with Kudpung about how best to sanction Kudpung?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk ... _33#Thanks

Wow,.
You guys have already crested the bar set by the previous ARBCOM for epic dipshittery.

I cannot vote in favour of a motion that stipulates that Kudpung's behaviour warrants a desysop, yet allows him to keep the tools without any concrete evidence that he has taken steps to restore the trust of the community. I also have serious concerns about using a remedy that was designed in consultation with Kudpung, while he steadfastly refused to participate meaningfully in this case. – bradv 13:35, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Uhhh, yeah....

[Jans Hammer]

Does anyone know what the fuck he's on about - and what he's on?

link

Some days later. Kudpung reiterates, discarding criticism as peanuts thrown from the peanut gallery. Isn't there a coconut gallery, in charge of coconut/desysop throwing against such behavior ? But hands are shaking in the coconut gallery. Coconuts are rather for the not-guilty cases. Because, as stated at the Super Mario Café, a well-deserved coconut would be too harsh.

[Vigilant]

Hmmmm

Kudpung and Chris.sherlock

5) Kudpung made two comments to Chris.sherlock (talk · contribs) that Chris.sherlock interpreted as threats. This incident was discussed on the administrator's noticeboard and was considered to be resolved after Kudpung wrote privately to Chris.sherlock clarifying his intention.

Narrator, "They were threats..."

Kudpung and Missvain

6) Kudpung nominated four articles created by Missvain for deletion using the proposed deletion process. Two of these nominations were made after he was made aware that Missvain would object and therefore could not be considered "uncontroversial", as all proposed deletions are required to be. Kudpung also started a discussion of Missvain's autopatrolled right, although without mentioning her username or notifying her of the discussion.

Narrator, "He knew damn well what he was doing..."

Kudpung and GorillaWarfare

7) In August 2018, GorillaWarfare asked Kudpung to refer to her by her username "when discussed among men". Kudpung reacted to negatively to this in comments referencing "men haters", publicly withdraw his support from the Women in Red WikiProject, and temporarily resigned as an administrator. Later the same month, Kudpung wrote an article in the Signpost critical of WMF director Katherine Maher. GorillaWarfare commented on the piece, describing it as continued "misogyny" on Kudpung's part. This comment led to an edit war and block of GorillaWarfare by uninvolved administrator Fram, which was subsequently overturned.

Kudpung and GorillaWarfare did not interact again until the ArbCom elections in November 2019. In response to a question about his boycott of Women in Red, Kudpung made reference to proud women [who] accuse such men [as Kudpung] of being misogynists. GorillaWarfare interpreted this as referring to her, and challenged Kudpung on why he emphasised that she is queer. Kudpung denied that he was referring to GorillaWarfare or any particular editor.

Narrator, "Kudpung is a thin-skinned asshole who dislikes strong women being uppity..."


How is it that all three of those FOFs can be passing unanimously but the desysop is somehow controversial?

[Eric Corbett]

Kudpung's sense of entitlement alone ought to disqualify him as an administrator, and if he has any sense at all, if the motion to suspend sentence for a year passes he ought to forget about Wikipedia for good.

Once a target gets painted on your back you're on your way out whatever you do.

[Vigilant]

Per my comments on series of FoF 4, I'd rather go with a less drastic solution. Ideally our admins should be aware that we expect collegial behavior and accountability for their actions, but if a lot of these previous attempts to resolve go nowhere fast, it risks normalizing such behavior. To me, such a remedy moves the goalposts; they should be moved, not by making an example out of an individual, but rather by encouraging the community to not quickly dismiss such noticeboard threads. Maxim(talk) 11:40, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Fram would like a word...

[Jans Hammer]

Kudpung's sense of entitlement alone ought to disqualify him as an administrator, and if he has any sense at all, if the motion to suspend sentence for a year passes he ought to forget about Wikipedia for good.

Once a target gets painted on your back you're on your way out whatever you do.

In his case, let's hope so...

[Midsize Jake]

Have they ever passed a "suspended remedy" like this before, in a potential "desysopping" case? I don't remember seeing one. I'm not sure I've even seen one proposed before.

Admittedly, I don't follow every single Arbcom case in detail, but I usually look into potential desysoppings... there haven't been that many over the years though, really. (Maybe I'm just getting too old or something.)

[Vigilant]

On what planet can an admin satisfy WP:ADMINCOND and have a one way interaction ban?

[el84]

Have they ever passed a "suspended remedy" like this before, in a potential "desysopping" case? I don't remember seeing one. I'm not sure I've even seen one proposed before.

Admittedly, I don't follow every single Arbcom case in detail, but I usually look into potential desysoppings... there haven't been that many over the years though, really. (Maybe I'm just getting too old or something.)

Probably in the past. You can tell it isn't common by the way they're scrambling around to try and justify it to themselves.

[turnedworm]

Have they ever passed a "suspended remedy" like this before, in a potential "desysopping" case? I don't remember seeing one. I'm not sure I've even seen one proposed before.

Admittedly, I don't follow every single Arbcom case in detail, but I usually look into potential desysoppings... there haven't been that many over the years though, really. (Maybe I'm just getting too old or something.)

I don't think that suspended remedies are compatible with desysopping. A suspended remedy implies that the removal is a punishment and, yes, of course it is, but primarily desysops should be done because the admin shouldn't be an admin. If the committee finds that the individual should not be an admin, then the admin bit should be removed.

I'm happy with the idea that a behaviour can be modified with some sort of sanction, and the individual could remain an admin - i.e. there are alternatives to desysopping - but a "suspended" desysop shouldn't be one of them.

Now, I haven't actually followed the case, so I can't comment on what should actually be happening, just on that general stance.

[Eric Corbett]

Let's look at it from another angle.

Has ArbCom ever suggested passing a suspended sentence on any non-admin? No, they haven't. This is just unwholesome wriggling.

[turnedworm]

Let's look at it from another angle.

Has ArbCom ever suggested passing a suspended sentence on any non-admin? No, they haven't. This is just unwholesome wriggling.

Most recent would be a proposed suspended interaction ban on 2 non admins in 2017 (link )

[Midsize Jake]

I guess what gets me about it is that it's such an obvious attempt to have it both ways, anybody can see through it. But if most of the current Arbcom members don't really care whether they get re-elected or not, then I guess that's to be expected — what have they got to lose? Their individual relationships with other Wikipedians are probably far more important to them than whatever they have invested in Arbcom as an institution. In which case, any "suspended remedy" is mostly for their benefit, when you get right down to it.

That said, if the only thing(s) the other Wikipedians are going to do about it is quietly grumble for a bit while a few of them cross their fingers waiting for Mr. Kudpung to screw up again, then there's not much to stop them. And it's not like he's being accused of an actual crime, after all.

[Jans Hammer]

Let's look at it from another angle.

Has ArbCom ever suggested passing a suspended sentence on any non-admin? No, they haven't. This is just unwholesome wriggling.

Most recent would be a proposed suspended interaction ban on 2 non admins in 2017 (link )

This is Arbcom led by Xeno who has been in cahoots with Kudpung for years concocting a special remedy for one of the most chronically abusive admins I have seen in 10 years. Friends in high fucking places. No doubt NYB is pulling some strings - maybe you are also. Zero trust.