Fram blocked by User:WMFOffice for 1 year

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 3:48 pm

Zoloft wrote:
Randy from Boise wrote:... Fram died for your sins.

RfB

Fram was mortally wounded for your sins...
RfB

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 3:56 pm

Randy from Boise wrote:
Zoloft wrote:
Randy from Boise wrote:... Fram died for your sins.

RfB

Fram was mortally wounded for your sins...
RfB

Fram will walk it off.

ARBCOM was mortally wounded.
Trust and Safety dropped a safe on their own toes.
Maria Sefidari is done next election.
Laura Hale will never edit wikipedia again.
Jimbo is seen to be utterly disconnected, yet again.
Katherine Maher is shown to be Marie Antoinette.
Doc James is demonstrably a coward.
The board is seen as feckless for overlooking Laura Hale's obvious COI.

All around, a nice fat body count for the HtD faction here.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 4:04 pm

I missed this little pity party prior.
link

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 6:26 pm

Eric Corbett wrote:
Poetlister wrote:
Eric Corbett wrote:What real "authority" does ArbCom have that can be undermined?
Quite a lot. It can block someone and no admin would dare to unblock. It can order an admin to be unfrocked and that would happen. It can make all sorts of decrees and they are usually enforced.
You're having a laugh.

Nobody has ever been blocked in any meaningful sense, as I'm quite sure that Kumioku would be very happy to explain to you. And nobody can ever be blocked unless and until the WMF comes to its senses and insists on its editors identifying themselves, which they'll never do. So it's a sham process that in reality means nothing, and encourages bounty hunters like Bb123 to go about their business as if it makes the slightest difference to anything.

OK, yes, technically it is blocking an account not an individual. But it means that if that individual returns, he/she can be shot on sight. There are more dangerous people than Bb123 about. And I hope you won't deny that it can order an admin to be unfrocked and that would happen.

Unread post by **Midsize Jake** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 8:12 pm

Vigilant wrote:I missed this little pity party prior.
link

"You did a good thing! None of this was your fault!"
"I know! And none of it was your fault either! We all did really good!"
"Everyone did the right thing! We're not responsible for any of this!"
"Doing the right thing is what we're really all about here! That's what's important!"
"Everything we did was completely forgivable! In fact, there's nothing to forgive!"
"Yeah, we did absolutely nothing! All we did was sit back and allow that one guy to do all our dirty work for us when it became really obvious that well-connected spammers were trying to monetize the Main Page! And then when somebody cherry-picked all the diffs showing how mean he was to them once it was clear they weren't going away, we threw him under the b--"
"Okay, that's enough self-justification for today, kids."

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Thu Oct 24, 2019 2:08 am

It looks like the WMFOffice is still SanFranBanning people while the board mandated 'consultation' continues to dragon without the participation of T&S or the WMF in general.

Tokota (T-C-L)
Cruks (T-C-L)
Wikinger (T-C-L)

Nothing obvious jumps out at me for these accounts.
Didn't dig very far though.

Osborne · Unread post by **Osborne** » Thu Oct 24, 2019 3:28 am

Vigilant wrote:It looks like the WMFOffice is still SanFranBanning people while the board mandated 'consultation' continues to dragon without the participation of T&S or the WMF in general.

Cruks / Tokota, serial sockpuppetteer banned since 21 October 2019 https://es.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =120014723
Wikinger also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category: ... f_Wikinger

These are community-initiated bans, implemented by the WMF. Not wmf-initiated SanFranBan.

Ming · Unread post by **Ming** » Thu Oct 24, 2019 3:40 am

Tokota got banned on the German WP, twice (once under another name). He's from Colombia and got into several fights over copyrights, vandalism, and WP:COMPETENCE. He also got into a lot of fights on commons over copyright. His last activity was around the end of June, about the time he got blocked on de.wp; Ming isn't seeing the connection between him and Cruks.

Osborne · Unread post by **Osborne** » Thu Oct 24, 2019 10:13 am

Ming wrote:Ming isn't seeing the connection between him and Cruks.

Osborne doesn't see it either. The block log however says something about a predecessor:
https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... type=block
The ban list treats them the same: https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_ ... nned_users

Cla68 · Unread post by **Cla68** » Thu Oct 24, 2019 4:26 pm

It looks to me that now that Drmies got his revenge (and I'm not saying it wasn't justified) he will probably not object again at Fram's next RfA attempt. Kiril Lokshin, however, may not let it go. The Wikimedia DC chapter makes it a major part of their platform to publicly promote diversity, inclusiveness, anti-harassment, etc. Whether or not they take it too far may be a subject for a different thread (they did, for example, invite Zoe Quinn to be a featured speaker at a DC event a few years ago), but I get the impression that they, or Mr. Lokshin at least, think Fram is guilty of harassing editors who belong to some of those special categories/groups that the DC chapter believes it is trying to support. So, unless Fram ever gets them to get off his back, he'll never be an administrator again.

This begs the question, why would Fram want to be part of an organization that treats him like this? I just checked his contribution history, and he's still slaving away like a busy little beaver over there on Wikipedia. Fram, as big as the Internet is, surely there must be something else that you could find fulfilling on it?

Osborne · Unread post by **Osborne** » Thu Oct 24, 2019 4:51 pm

Cla68 wrote:This begs the question, why would Fram want to be part of an organization that treats him like this?

That's a loaded question... Here's a few more:
Why would any editor be part of an organization that... wait he's not part of the organization, he's part of the community.
Why would any editor be part of a community that treats them like this? - Addiction? Belief in creating something beneficial? Sacrifice?
Why would any community want an admin that treats people like he does?

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Thu Oct 24, 2019 8:32 pm

Vigilant wrote:the board mandated 'consultation' continues to dragon

Do you mean "to be a non-existent monster" or "to breathe fire"? Neither is inappropriate.

Unread post by **Midsize Jake** » Thu Oct 24, 2019 8:46 pm

Osborne wrote:Why would any editor be part of an organization that... wait he's not part of the organization, he's part of the community.
Why would any editor be part of a community that treats them like this? - Addiction? Belief in creating something beneficial? Sacrifice?

If he simply disappears, then the terrorists win!

Why would any community want an admin that treats people like he does?

OK, I saw what you did there.

But the answer is very simple: Because they don't want to be the ones having to do the things he was doing, and at least half of them realized that somebody who has admin rights has to do them. That said, there may never be another Laura Hale, ever again - the challenge she posed was (IMO) extremely unusual and possibly unique. So maybe they don't need him anymore - at least, that's what they're hoping.

It's possible Mr. Fram took on those problems simply because he thought (wrongly) it would make him indispensable, but I personally see no reason to assume the cynical explanation in this case. And I wouldn't say that "addiction," "belief" and "self-sacrifice" are mutually exclusive possibilities here, either.

Osborne · Unread post by **Osborne** » Thu Oct 24, 2019 9:55 pm

But the answer is very simple: Because they don't want to be the ones having to do the things he was doing

I'm worried, that will be the reason to keep Bbb23 around...
However I don't see him "saving" wp from LH as a necessity, nor a clearly good thing, as I don't see LH damaging wp, nor improving it, for that matter.
The way he approached that "issue" is more about him, than about the "encyclopedia".

Midsize Jake wrote:And I wouldn't say that "addiction," "belief" and "self-sacrifice" are mutually exclusive possibilities here, either.

Neither would I say.

Unread post by **Midsize Jake** » Thu Oct 24, 2019 11:38 pm

Osborne wrote:However I don't see him "saving" wp from LH as a necessity, nor a clearly good thing, as I don't see LH damaging wp, nor improving it, for that matter.

Ah, but "saving" is your word, so why is it in quotes? That's not what he was doing, nor would it have occurred to him. The basis of the dispute has already been established: He became interested in keeping spammy links off of the main page around the same time LH got interested in putting them on, so naturally they had a conflict. Under normal circumstances, what he did in that conflict would have driven LH out of the DYK business, if not out of WP completely - but it didn't, and now we know why.

I agree that he didn't have to do it, but at most it amounted to an attempt to "save" the WP main page from her, not the whole website. Obviously a lot of people use the main page as a "portal" of sorts, but it's a tiny fraction of their overall visitor count at best.

Now, at the (almost) end of the whole business, if I were allowed to ask Fram only one question for which I could be guaranteed an honest answer, it would be: "If you had known in mid-2014 that Laura Hale had just married Maria Sefidari, and that Sefidari would eventually become the Chairperson of the WMF Board of Trustees, but without knowing for certain what would ultimately happen in 2019, would you have kept trying to stop her from posting poorly-written mass-produced stubs on non-notable sports topics?"

Of course, ideally I would get to ask at least two questions, the second of which would be, "What if you knew then everything you know now," but that strikes me as somewhat less compelling for some reason.

Carcharoth · Unread post by **Carcharoth** » Fri Oct 25, 2019 12:13 am

I sort of asked that here. As seen here, no response. You could ask yourself now, I suppose.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Fri Oct 25, 2019 12:33 am

Carcharoth wrote:I sort of asked that here. As seen here, no response. You could ask yourself now, I suppose.

If the WMF were a professional organization, it would have lead to Maria Sefidari Huici's immediate resignation and Laura Hale's removal from all things wikimedia

The multiple undeclared conflicts of interest on the part of a board member would normally have been disqualifying for continuing in that role.

Her lies about her education credentials, PhD candidate in Computer Science, University Professor, would also have lead to her departure in any sane organization.

There are so many parallels between the WMF and the Trump administration.
* The lying
* The conflicts of interest
* The incompetence
* The nepotism
* The hiring practices
* The infighting
* The utter lack of transparency
* The die hard fan base who will always believe
* The grifting

Unread post by **Midsize Jake** » Fri Oct 25, 2019 2:42 am

Carcharoth wrote:I sort of asked that here. As seen here, no response. You could ask yourself now, I suppose.

I promise I hadn't already seen that...

It's a logical question to ask, but let's face it - if he wants to stay in The Faithful's good graces, he has to ignore it. If he says "yes" then it suggests he wouldn't have cared about the highly-disruptive consequences, and if he says "no" it suggests that he would have cared more about his position than about doing the right thing.

Fram actually took a fairly long "wikibreak" at the end of 2014, mostly because of the DYK issue (according to the op-ed, anyway). I'm inclined to think that if he'd known what was going to happen, and why, he just wouldn't have come back.

el84 · Unread post by **el84** » Fri Oct 25, 2019 8:28 am

From the Signpost article linked, I looked at what Fram described as his first foray into DYK:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... orongurups

The usual suspects are lurking around there.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Fri Oct 25, 2019 10:14 am

Taking a random look at her articles that were promoted to DYK, I came across Gibraltar Peak (Canberra), promoted late October with the hook "that rubbish has been illegally dumped on Gibraltar Peak near Canberra?". Sadly, both the source and the article don't contain this fact; in reality, rubbish was dumped illegally near Gibraltar Peak, not on it. The same article claims that "Two types of ichnofossils can be found on Gibraltar Peak", but the source given is talking about Gibraltar Peak on Antarctica, near Explorers Range and Sledgers Glacier. Fram (talk) 09:42, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Fri Oct 25, 2019 3:10 pm

Vigilant wrote:There are so many parallels between the WMF and the Trump administration.

Unfortunately, the WMF cannot be impeached, nor is there any term limit to its rule.

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Fri Oct 25, 2019 3:23 pm

Poetlister wrote:
Vigilant wrote:There are so many parallels between the WMF and the Trump administration.
Unfortunately, the WMF cannot be impeached, nor is there any term limit to its rule.

Vig's list of loosely-spun generalities reminds me of the list of AMAZING FACTS showing that how FANTASTICALLY SIMILAR Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy were...

Lincoln–Kennedy coincidences urban legend (T-H-L)

RfB

P.S. From the mouths of babes (from the article): "Some urban folklorists have postulated that the list provided a way for people to make sense of two tragic events in American history by seeking out patterns."

Moral Hazard · Unread post by **Moral Hazard** » Fri Oct 25, 2019 5:00 pm

Vigilant wrote:
Taking a random look at her articles that were promoted to DYK, I came across Gibraltar Peak (Canberra), promoted late October with the hook "that rubbish has been illegally dumped on Gibraltar Peak near Canberra?". Sadly, both the source and the article don't contain this fact; in reality, rubbish was dumped illegally near Gibraltar Peak, not on it. The same article claims that "Two types of ichnofossils can be found on Gibraltar Peak", but the source given is talking about Gibraltar Peak on Antarctica, near Explorers Range and Sledgers Glacier. Fram (talk) 09:42, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Laura says "on";
The source says "near".

Laura says "Australia";
The source says says "Antartica".

"On". "Near".
"Australia". "Antartica".
Let's call the whole thing off.

Moral Hazard · Unread post by **Moral Hazard** » Fri Oct 25, 2019 5:09 pm

Obviously, in her absence from Wikipedia, Laura has taken up a new job as the fact-checker for Donald Trump's speech-writers.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/vid ... rado-video

https://eu.burlingtonfreepress.com/stor ... 081719002/

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Fri Oct 25, 2019 7:54 pm

Moral Hazard wrote:Obviously, in her absence from Wikipedia, Laura has taken up a new job as the fact-checker for Donald Trump's speech-writers.

No, Donald Trump, confused by the name, has handed New Mexico over to Mexico.

Unread post by **Midsize Jake** » Fri Oct 25, 2019 8:04 pm

Poetlister wrote:No, Donald Trump, confused by the name, has handed New Mexico over to Mexico.

I have to say though, if I were Mexico, this might be the one part of the wall I would actually consider paying for.

Beeblebrox · Unread post by **Beeblebrox** » Fri Oct 25, 2019 9:29 pm

Poetlister wrote:
Moral Hazard wrote:Obviously, in her absence from Wikipedia, Laura has taken up a new job as the fact-checker for Donald Trump's speech-writers.
No, Donald Trump, confused by the name, has handed New Mexico over to Mexico.

He's probably wondering how Brexit will effect New England...

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Sat Oct 26, 2019 4:14 pm

Beeblebrox wrote:
Poetlister wrote:
Moral Hazard wrote:Obviously, in her absence from Wikipedia, Laura has taken up a new job as the fact-checker for Donald Trump's speech-writers.
No, Donald Trump, confused by the name, has handed New Mexico over to Mexico.
He's probably wondering how Brexit will effect New England...

Not to mention New York, if he's aware that York is in England.

Osborne · Unread post by **Osborne** » Sat Oct 26, 2019 4:16 pm

Some very bored ppl here

MrErnie · Unread post by **MrErnie** » Wed Nov 06, 2019 10:43 am

I had forgotten about Sander v Ginkel. I wonder if that guy ever sent in a complaint about Fram that made its way into the T&S dossier? Of the ~12 or so possible hinted at complainants, here would be a couple guesses from me:

Laura Hale (confirmed in the dossier)
Louis Alain (confirmed in the dossier)
Guido den Broeder
Elisa Rolle
Francis Schonken
Sander v Ginkel
Gatoclass? - failed arb request
Cwmhiraeth? - failed arb request

Guido den Broeder · Unread post by **Guido den Broeder** » Wed Nov 06, 2019 2:19 pm

MrErnie wrote:I had forgotten about Sander v Ginkel. I wonder if that guy ever sent in a complaint about Fram that made its way into the T&S dossier? Of the ~12 or so possible hinted at complainants, here would be a couple guesses from me:

Laura Hale (confirmed in the dossier)
Louis Alain (confirmed in the dossier)
Guido den Broeder
Elisa Rolle
Francis Schonken
Sander v Ginkel
Gatoclass? - failed arb request
Cwmhiraeth? - failed arb request

My case is in the dossier but I didn't file anything. Possibly Opabinia did in a miserable attempt to redeem herself, but it's more likely that T&S found it on their own. Numerous uses by Frank M. and friends of the word 'pedophile' would surely ring an alarm bell. (Given their assigned task, rest assured that T&S have checked all my edits and found nothing that warrants such an insinuation, or they would have globally locked my account.)

[Just passing by.]

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Tue Nov 12, 2019 11:27 am

In expected fashion, Karen Brown aka Fluffernutter, has attempted to mischaracterize the issues that en.wp had with the WMF's handling of the SanFramBan.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_ta ... sultation?

Hi again folks. I have taken the question of a panel closure back to the team to be discussed, but in the meantime I wanted to let you know that I've submitted my recommended closure to management here at the WMF for approval, and my recommendation is the complete removal of the partial and temporary ban tools from the Office Action policy. That conclusion is still pending approval, so it's not an official done deal yet, but I do expect it to be approved and for that to be the close. Kbrown (WMF) (talk) 18:37, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Utterly dishonest.

She gets called on it.

Kbrown your proposal is unacceptable, or at best it is incomplete. I refer you back to the Board of Trustees statement:
T&S focus on the most severe cases, for instance: the handling of legal issues, threats of violence, cross-wiki abuse, and child protection issues until consultation and agreement between T&S and the community are achieved.
If anyone attempts to declare the issue resolved by "complete removal of the partial and temporary ban tools from the Office Action policy" I will open an RFC proposing that NO AGREEMENT has been reached between T&S and the community. I suspect it will get consensus, and I will bring that consensus to the Executive Director and the Board.

The Foundation itself quite firmly emphasized that the the temporary & partial ban policy is completely irrelevant to the problem here. See these quotes:
* One of the recent changes to the Trust & Safety policy is the introduction of new options that include time-limited and partial (project-specific) bans to address serious concerns that are considered temporary or project-specific in nature. This change to policy is not a change of the team’s scope of cases taken. - Jan (WMF) (talk) 20:44, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
* Prior to this policy update, the only sanction option available in a case like this would have been an indefinite global ban. - WMFOffice (talk) 19:27, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Having T&S take the same case again, and be more narrowly limited to only issuing a permanent global ban, just makes the problem worse.

Members of T&S have attempted to narrowly restrict the scope of discussion to within "limited and partial bans", and rejecting discussion on scope of cases taken. So long as T&S are unwilling or unable to address the underlying problem, I expect the community will be content to allow the "no agreement" status quo remain in place permanently. Alsee (talk) 23:20, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Thu Nov 14, 2019 1:29 am

A comedy in 47 parts in which nothing is learned.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... ch_process

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:42 am

Can someone post this link to Karen Brown's page?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... _WMF_Board

Osborne · Unread post by **Osborne** » Thu Nov 14, 2019 9:06 am

Vigilant wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:42 am
Can someone post this link to Karen Brown's page?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... _WMF_Board

open letter wrote:30 June 2019

Ehm. You are 4.5 months late.
Btw that was written by the "Most incompetent ArbCom (TM)", according to you.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:10 am

Osborne wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 14, 2019 9:06 am

Vigilant wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:42 am
Can someone post this link to Karen Brown's page?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... _WMF_Board

open letter wrote:30 June 2019
Ehm. You are 4.5 months late.
Btw that was written by the "Most incompetent ArbCom (TM)", according to you.

The WMF needs to be reminded of what the issue with the SanFramBan actually was, as stated by their proxies, ARBCOM.

Guido den Broeder · Unread post by **Guido den Broeder** » Thu Nov 14, 2019 1:49 pm

Vigilant wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:10 am

Osborne wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 14, 2019 9:06 am

Vigilant wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:42 am
Can someone post this link to Karen Brown's page?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... _WMF_Board

open letter wrote:30 June 2019
Ehm. You are 4.5 months late.
Btw that was written by the "Most incompetent ArbCom (TM)", according to you.
The WMF needs to be reminded of what the issue with the SanFramBan actually was, as stated by their proxies, ARBCOM.

Maybe, but this wasn't it.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:05 pm

Guido den Broeder wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 14, 2019 1:49 pm

Vigilant wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:10 am

Osborne wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 14, 2019 9:06 am

Vigilant wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:42 am
Can someone post this link to Karen Brown's page?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... _WMF_Board

open letter wrote:30 June 2019
Ehm. You are 4.5 months late.
Btw that was written by the "Most incompetent ArbCom (TM)", according to you.
The WMF needs to be reminded of what the issue with the SanFramBan actually was, as stated by their proxies, ARBCOM.
Maybe, but this wasn't it.

I thought you were leaving forever...

viewtopic.php?f=38&t=10524&p=242478#p242503

That apparently only goes for hostile forum members, in view of another record close before anyone friendly or neutral can have a word in. I am therefore ending my membership and leave you all to rot by yourselves. This is not a criticism forum anymore. It has become a forum for bullies. We already have one of those, it's called Wikipedia.

Why is it that the worst posters continually complain and threaten to diva quit?
Why don't you keep your word for a change?

I hear sucks has a training kennel setup especially for you.

Osborne · Unread post by **Osborne** » Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:34 pm

back Guido!

Guido den Broeder · Unread post by **Guido den Broeder** » Thu Nov 14, 2019 6:07 pm

Vigilant wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:05 pm

Guido den Broeder wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 14, 2019 1:49 pm

Vigilant wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:10 am

Osborne wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 14, 2019 9:06 am

Vigilant wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:42 am
Can someone post this link to Karen Brown's page?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... _WMF_Board

open letter wrote:30 June 2019
Ehm. You are 4.5 months late.
Btw that was written by the "Most incompetent ArbCom (TM)", according to you.
The WMF needs to be reminded of what the issue with the SanFramBan actually was, as stated by their proxies, ARBCOM.
Maybe, but this wasn't it.
I thought you were leaving forever...

viewtopic.php?f=38&t=10524&p=242478#p242503
That apparently only goes for hostile forum members, in view of another record close before anyone friendly or neutral can have a word in. I am therefore ending my membership and leave you all to rot by yourselves. This is not a criticism forum anymore. It has become a forum for bullies. We already have one of those, it's called Wikipedia.
Why is it that the worst posters continually complain and threaten to diva quit?
Why don't you keep your word for a change?

I hear sucks has a training kennel setup especially for you.

Just checking if you're rotting nicely. Happy to see that you sped things up.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Thu Nov 14, 2019 7:38 pm

My preferred pronouns revolve around 'composting'.

Bigot.

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Thu Nov 14, 2019 9:27 pm

Osborne wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:34 pm
back Guido!

Just when we were running out of light entertainment!

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:07 pm

Wooh, woooh!!

Here's comes the railroading!!

https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php? ... d=19555957

Beeblebrox · Unread post by **Beeblebrox** » Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:56 pm

Meh. The result is the right one. That's about as close to a win as this was ever going to get.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Fri Nov 15, 2019 12:30 am

Beeblebrox wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:56 pm
Meh. The result is the right one. That's about as close to a win as this was ever going to get.

The T&S dipshits are trying to avoid having to leave local stuff the local ARBCOMs.
They are trying to narrowly construe the uprising as against partial/temporary bans and not against T&S's vast overreach.

That's what the links are about.

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Fri Nov 15, 2019 3:43 pm

Why is it necessary to have a Steward make recommendations?

Earthy Astringent · Unread post by **Earthy Astringent** » Fri Nov 15, 2019 6:09 pm

I’m out of the loop. Is Fram back and failed an RfA? Who has egg on their face?

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Fri Nov 15, 2019 6:50 pm

Earthy Astringent wrote: ↑
Fri Nov 15, 2019 6:09 pm
I’m out of the loop. Is Fram back and failed an RfA?

Yep, yep. That would be the short summary.

RfB

Beeblebrox · Unread post by **Beeblebrox** » Fri Nov 15, 2019 7:58 pm

Poetlister wrote: ↑
Fri Nov 15, 2019 3:43 pm
Why is it necessary to have a Steward make recommendations?

Kind of wondering that myself. I assume the context is back down the chain of emails.

Boing! said Zebedee · Unread post by **Boing! said Zebedee** » Fri Nov 15, 2019 8:18 pm

Vigilant wrote: ↑
Fri Nov 15, 2019 12:30 am
They are trying to narrowly construe the uprising as against partial/temporary bans and not against T&S's vast overreach.

Yep, that's my take on it too - they just don't seem to have grasped that the objections are not about what they shouldn't be doing it with, but that they shouldn't be doing it (or they have grasped it, and choose not to listen).