Fram was mortally wounded for your sins...Zoloft wrote:Randy from Boise wrote:... Fram died for your sins.
RfB
RfB
Fram was mortally wounded for your sins...Zoloft wrote:Randy from Boise wrote:... Fram died for your sins.
RfB
Fram will walk it off.Randy from Boise wrote:Fram was mortally wounded for your sins...Zoloft wrote:Randy from Boise wrote:... Fram died for your sins.
RfB
RfB
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.Eric Corbett wrote:You're having a laugh.Poetlister wrote: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.Eric Corbett wrote:What real "authority" does ArbCom have that can be undermined?
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.
"You did a good thing! None of this was your fault!"Vigilant wrote:I missed this little pity party prior.
link
Cruks / Tokota, serial sockpuppetteer banned since 21 October 2019 https://es.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =120014723Vigilant 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.
Osborne doesn't see it either. The block log however says something about a predecessor:Ming wrote:Ming isn't seeing the connection between him and Cruks.
That's a loaded question... Here's a few more:Cla68 wrote:This begs the question, why would Fram want to be part of an organization that treats him like this?
Do you mean "to be a non-existent monster" or "to breathe fire"? Neither is inappropriate.Vigilant wrote:the board mandated 'consultation' continues to dragon
If he simply disappears, then the terrorists win!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?
OK, I saw what you did there.Why would any community want an admin that treats people like he does?
I'm worried, that will be the reason to keep Bbb23 around...But the answer is very simple: Because they don't want to be the ones having to do the things he was doing
Neither would I say.Midsize Jake wrote:And I wouldn't say that "addiction," "belief" and "self-sacrifice" are mutually exclusive possibilities here, either.
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.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.
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
I promise I hadn't already seen that...
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)
Unfortunately, the WMF cannot be impeached, nor is there any term limit to its rule.Vigilant wrote:There are so many parallels between the WMF and the Trump administration.
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...Poetlister wrote:Unfortunately, the WMF cannot be impeached, nor is there any term limit to its rule.Vigilant wrote:There are so many parallels between the WMF and the Trump administration.
Laura says "on";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)
No, Donald Trump, confused by the name, has handed New Mexico over to Mexico.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.
I have to say though, if I were Mexico, this might be the one part of the wall I would actually consider paying for.Poetlister wrote: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 wrote:No, Donald Trump, confused by the name, has handed New Mexico over to Mexico.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.
Not to mention New York, if he's aware that York is in England.Beeblebrox wrote:He's probably wondering how Brexit will effect New England...Poetlister wrote:No, Donald Trump, confused by the name, has handed New Mexico over to Mexico.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.
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.)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
Utterly dishonest.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)
Kbrown your proposal is unacceptable, or at best it is incomplete. I refer you back to the Board of Trustees statement: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.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.
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 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:42 amCan someone post this link to Karen Brown's page?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... _WMF_Board
Ehm. You are 4.5 months late.open letter wrote:30 June 2019
The WMF needs to be reminded of what the issue with the SanFramBan actually was, as stated by their proxies, ARBCOM.Osborne wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 9:06 amVigilant wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:42 amCan someone post this link to Karen Brown's page?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... _WMF_BoardEhm. You are 4.5 months late.open letter wrote:30 June 2019
Btw that was written by the "Most incompetent ArbCom (TM)", according to you.
Maybe, but this wasn't it.Vigilant wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:10 amThe WMF needs to be reminded of what the issue with the SanFramBan actually was, as stated by their proxies, ARBCOM.Osborne wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 9:06 amVigilant wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:42 amCan someone post this link to Karen Brown's page?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... _WMF_BoardEhm. You are 4.5 months late.open letter wrote:30 June 2019
Btw that was written by the "Most incompetent ArbCom (TM)", according to you.
I thought you were leaving forever...Guido den Broeder wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 1:49 pmMaybe, but this wasn't it.Vigilant wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:10 amThe WMF needs to be reminded of what the issue with the SanFramBan actually was, as stated by their proxies, ARBCOM.Osborne wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 9:06 amVigilant wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:42 amCan someone post this link to Karen Brown's page?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... _WMF_BoardEhm. You are 4.5 months late.open letter wrote:30 June 2019
Btw that was written by the "Most incompetent ArbCom (TM)", according to you.
Why is it that the worst posters continually complain and threaten to diva quit?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.
Just checking if you're rotting nicely. Happy to see that you sped things up.Vigilant wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:05 pmI thought you were leaving forever...Guido den Broeder wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 1:49 pmMaybe, but this wasn't it.Vigilant wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:10 amThe WMF needs to be reminded of what the issue with the SanFramBan actually was, as stated by their proxies, ARBCOM.Osborne wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 9:06 amVigilant wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:42 amCan someone post this link to Karen Brown's page?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... _WMF_BoardEhm. You are 4.5 months late.open letter wrote:30 June 2019
Btw that was written by the "Most incompetent ArbCom (TM)", according to you.
viewtopic.php?f=38&t=10524&p=242478#p242503Why is it that the worst posters continually complain and threaten to diva quit?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 don't you keep your word for a change?
I hear sucks has a training kennel setup especially for you.
Just when we were running out of light entertainment!
The T&S dipshits are trying to avoid having to leave local stuff the local ARBCOMs.Beeblebrox wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:56 pmMeh. The result is the right one. That's about as close to a win as this was ever going to get.
Yep, yep. That would be the short summary.Earthy Astringent wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 6:09 pmI’m out of the loop. Is Fram back and failed an RfA?
Kind of wondering that myself. I assume the context is back down the chain of emails.Poetlister wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 3:43 pmWhy is it necessary to have a Steward make recommendations?
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).