Tamzin RfA

Discussions on Wikimedia governance
User avatar
Trismic
Critic
Posts: 159
kołdry
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 5:59 pm
Actual Name: Tristan

Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Trismic » Mon Apr 25, 2022 4:47 am


User avatar
Bezdomni
Habitué
Posts: 2935
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:07 pm
Wikipedia User: RosasHills
Location: Monster Vainglory ON (.. party HQ ..)
Contact:

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Bezdomni » Mon Apr 25, 2022 6:22 pm

Question 7 is curious & fun: as Tamzin, she's still a property creator 🏰 & 🏯 & 🏭 but not an admin.

That could be a good story (or not).
los auberginos

User avatar
Ritchie333
Gregarious
Posts: 537
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:20 pm
Wikipedia User: Ritchie333
Location: London, broadly construed

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Ritchie333 » Mon Apr 25, 2022 6:47 pm

Nominated by Drmies. What could possibly go wrong? :evilgrin:

User avatar
Trismic
Critic
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 5:59 pm
Actual Name: Tristan

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Trismic » Tue Apr 26, 2022 2:24 am

Ritchie333 wrote:
Mon Apr 25, 2022 6:47 pm
Nominated by Drmies. What could possibly go wrong? :evilgrin:
Idk, but I certainly doubt that Kudpung will be making many nominations going forward.

Beeblebrox
Habitué
Posts: 3787
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 9:30 pm
Wikipedia User: Just Step Sideways
Location: The end of the road, Alaska

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Beeblebrox » Tue Apr 26, 2022 4:47 pm

Well, this looks certain to sail through. 5 days to go, 179 supports, only 3 opposes, none of which are compelling.
information is not knowledge, knowledge is not wisdom

User avatar
Trismic
Critic
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 5:59 pm
Actual Name: Tristan

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Trismic » Thu Apr 28, 2022 5:38 pm

Well, she thinks everyone on the political right is a fascist and unsuitable for adminship, so she clearly fits right in with the rest of the admin corps and the community at large in that respect.

Beeblebrox
Habitué
Posts: 3787
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 9:30 pm
Wikipedia User: Just Step Sideways
Location: The end of the road, Alaska

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Beeblebrox » Thu Apr 28, 2022 7:07 pm

Trismic wrote:
Thu Apr 28, 2022 5:38 pm
Well, she thinks everyone on the political right is a fascist and unsuitable for adminship, so she clearly fits right in with the rest of the admin corps and the community at large in that respect.
Could you maybe point out where you're getting that from?

EDIT: I assume it is in reference to this question:
14. Could you please elaborate on this comment which you made at another RfA, parts of which concern me. To be clear your objection to true political extremists is not in itself an issue, and would likely be a deal breaker for me as well. But do you believe that disqualifying political extremism exists only on the far right (Fascists), or does this also include Communists (Stalinists and the like)? In particular I am concerned with your statement that anyone whose politics are right of center could not gain your support at RfA and you expressed comfort with desysopping anyone who supported former president Trump. Are these still your views? Thank you in advance for your reply.
A: So, to take that as three sub-questions:
Support of oppressive regimes should be disqualifying, period. The most common form of that that we see on enwiki is support of far-right oppressive regimes, and that's what was being discussed in that conversation, but certainly the left has its own problems in that regard, including, yes, apologism for the crimes against humanity committed by Stalin, Mao, and other leftists. That ought to be disqualifying too.
I shouldn't have said I would never vote for a right-of-center admin candidate. That was hyperbole during a heated conversation, but that's no excuse. What I was trying to convey is that that is something that would make me tend against supporting. I don't think it's unreasonable to judge someone's fitness for a position of trust based on one's impression of the reasonableness (or lack thereof) of their political views. That's an equal-opportunity thing: If someone concludes that, from their perspective, my political views (to the extent I've ever discussed those publicly) call my judgment into question, then I don't fault them for opposing or declining to support on that basis. Political views are one of the best measures of someone's character, and should not be off-limits in assessing people. At the same time, it should not be the only consideration, definitely not a litmus test, unless someone falls into the groups discussed in Point 1.
I think that avowed, continuing support for Donald Trump constitutes support for an oppressive regime, and thus should be disqualifying for the same reasons discussed in Point 1. Without turning this into a polemic, see generally the aftermath of the 2020 election and the events of January 6th, 2021. Of course, that's entirely hypothetical; I do not expect the community or ArbCom to ever actually impose such a test on administrators, and have no intention to propose one myself.
I think that that comment generated more heat than light, and if I could do it over I wouldn't have phrased it the way that I did. That thread is probably the most intense argument I've gotten into since my return to editing in October of 2020, and I'd just as soon not wind up in that position again. I do better when I'm making people happy, not angry.
information is not knowledge, knowledge is not wisdom

User avatar
ScotFinnRadish
Regular
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2022 1:13 pm
Wikipedia User: ScottishFinnishRadish
Actual Name: Stephen Root Vegetable

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by ScotFinnRadish » Thu Apr 28, 2022 7:31 pm

The not supporting anyone right-of-center for RfA isn't great, but I don't think it's necessarily disqualifying. The big issues I see are what actually counts as right of center, versus center, and will they keep their mop out of political stuff. If they'll keep their mop out of the political arena, then I don't even care where they think right of center starts.

User avatar
Scorpions13256
Now living on a nice farm upstate
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2021 7:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Scorpions13256

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Scorpions13256 » Thu Apr 28, 2022 8:48 pm

I am the one responsible for the recent drama. I still have no intention of opposing. Had I been opposed to her becoming an administrator, I would have voted oppose without consulting anybody. Furthermore, I would have been armed with the diff in question.

User avatar
ScotFinnRadish
Regular
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2022 1:13 pm
Wikipedia User: ScottishFinnishRadish
Actual Name: Stephen Root Vegetable

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by ScotFinnRadish » Thu Apr 28, 2022 8:57 pm

I supported having read that diff, and the questions and such. I'm more disturbed at the backlash from others for opposing because of it, than what she said. Especially since she said in her answer about it
If someone concludes that, from their perspective, my political views (to the extent I've ever discussed those publicly) call my judgment into question, then I don't fault them for opposing or declining to support on that basis.
The support ratio is still 25 to 1, and I think the outrage of people opposing is probably doing more harm than good.

nableezy
Gregarious
Posts: 508
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 2:30 am
Wikipedia User: nableezy

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by nableezy » Fri Apr 29, 2022 2:59 am

ScotFinnRadish wrote:
Thu Apr 28, 2022 7:31 pm
The not supporting anyone right-of-center for RfA isn't great, but I don't think it's necessarily disqualifying. The big issues I see are what actually counts as right of center, versus center, and will they keep their mop out of political stuff. If they'll keep their mop out of the political arena, then I don't even care where they think right of center starts.
Somehow people are taking an opposition to people supporting what they view as fascist/oppressive regimes to being admins to actions taken against those people either as admins or editors. Nowhere does Tamzin ever say somebody who supports Trump should be sanctioned, or that they should be silenced and not allowed to edit. Nowhere is there any indication that this view would impact her administrative actions. But thinking that somebody who is in favor of unbridled power being used capriciously maybe shouldnt be given any extra power on the 7th most visited website on the planet is being transformed in to she'll block all the Trumpistas. And nobody is considering why somebody whose very being makes them a target of abuse from those fascist/oppressive regimes might find such views disqualifying for gaining additional power. How many people in the West right now would consider public support for Putin to be disqualifying for adminship? But to the point, nothing in that supposedly outrageous diff says one thing about what she would do as an admin.

Beeblebrox
Habitué
Posts: 3787
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 9:30 pm
Wikipedia User: Just Step Sideways
Location: The end of the road, Alaska

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Beeblebrox » Fri Apr 29, 2022 3:35 am

What I'm seeing is that Tamzin regrets the exact wording of the original post, but still believes fascists and people dumb enough to believe Trump's Big Lie don't have the judgement to administrate ...anything... which I completely agree with.
information is not knowledge, knowledge is not wisdom

User avatar
Midsize Jake
Site Admin
Posts: 9872
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:10 pm
Wikipedia Review Member: Somey

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Midsize Jake » Fri Apr 29, 2022 3:48 am

nableezy wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 2:59 am
...Nowhere does Tamzin ever say somebody who supports Trump should be sanctioned, or that they should be silenced and not allowed to edit. Nowhere is there any indication that this view would impact her administrative actions. But thinking that somebody who is in favor of unbridled power being used capriciously maybe shouldnt be given any extra power on the 7th most visited website on the planet is being transformed in to she'll block all the Trumpistas.
Absurdly hyperbolic reactions that focus on dubious victimhood-perceptions are very common amongst our right-wing friends, especially in the USA. But these reactions might have less to do with politics than with the intensity of some of these people's feelings about Wikipedia adminship — I suspect that a lot of these folks would vastly prefer being indefinitely blocked, with or without justification, to being subjected to a pile-on of Oppose votes in their own RfA that ultimately leads to their having to withdraw from it.

At the same time, let's not forget that a common tactic among "Trumpistas" and other right-wing activists — not to mention semi-professional internet "trolls" in general — is to get themselves banned, blocked, etc., intentionally, so they can then claim both victimhood and censorship. Those who are particularly clever can sometimes manipulate the process to ensure that a particular admin ends up being the one to block them, and in the case of Trump supporters, someone with a documented record of anti-Trump sentiments is likely to be a choice target. Presumably that's one of the main reasons why WP:INVOLVED exists, but that's certainly not going to work as intended every single time.

Beeblebrox
Habitué
Posts: 3787
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 9:30 pm
Wikipedia User: Just Step Sideways
Location: The end of the road, Alaska

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Beeblebrox » Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:10 am

Like these supposed Christians who wanted so desperately to be discriminated against that they did it to themselves: link
information is not knowledge, knowledge is not wisdom

User avatar
Ritchie333
Gregarious
Posts: 537
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:20 pm
Wikipedia User: Ritchie333
Location: London, broadly construed

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Ritchie333 » Fri Apr 29, 2022 12:07 pm

Jeez, what is it with Trump supporters? You pull out documented facts of fraud, sexual abuse allegations, and bullying, all documented in multiple independent reliable sources, and they start crying BLP.

MrErnie
Habitué
Posts: 1172
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2015 9:15 am

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by MrErnie » Fri Apr 29, 2022 12:48 pm

Ritchie333 wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 12:07 pm
Jeez, what is it with Trump supporters? You pull out documented facts of fraud, sexual abuse allegations, and bullying, all documented in multiple independent reliable sources, and they start crying BLP.
Yeah seriously what's their problem? Joe Biden sexual assault allegation (T-H-L)

Tamzin also writes that El C is one of the best AE admins, so on that basis I can't trust their judgment.

MrErnie
Habitué
Posts: 1172
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2015 9:15 am

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by MrErnie » Fri Apr 29, 2022 2:44 pm

24 opposes in the last day and counting.

User avatar
Trismic
Critic
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 5:59 pm
Actual Name: Tristan

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Trismic » Fri Apr 29, 2022 3:01 pm

27. :popcorn:

Beeblebrox
Habitué
Posts: 3787
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 9:30 pm
Wikipedia User: Just Step Sideways
Location: The end of the road, Alaska

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Beeblebrox » Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:00 pm

Got nearly as many new supports in the same time frame, still at 90% with 2 days to go.
information is not knowledge, knowledge is not wisdom

User avatar
Trismic
Critic
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 5:59 pm
Actual Name: Tristan

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Trismic » Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:06 pm

What would happen if near the end, there was a clear trend of opposition going right into closing time that would have brought the support% into discretionary range? Would the rfa be extended to allow more in the community to comment?

nableezy
Gregarious
Posts: 508
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 2:30 am
Wikipedia User: nableezy

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by nableezy » Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:09 pm

Trismic wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:06 pm
What would happen if near the end, there was a clear trend of opposition going right into closing time that would have brought the support% into discretionary range? Would the rfa be extended to allow more in the community to comment?
Somebody would surely tweet THE POLES ARE CLOSED and that would be that.

Beeblebrox
Habitué
Posts: 3787
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 9:30 pm
Wikipedia User: Just Step Sideways
Location: The end of the road, Alaska

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Beeblebrox » Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:21 pm

Trismic wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:06 pm
What would happen if near the end, there was a clear trend of opposition going right into closing time that would have brought the support% into discretionary range? Would the rfa be extended to allow more in the community to comment?
Well, as usual, we have a somewhat vague rule: "In exceptional circumstances, bureaucrats may extend RfAs beyond seven days or restart the nomination to make consensus clearer. " I don't personally think that "someone brought this up five days ago (by the time it is ripe for closing) and there might be more people who haven't dropped by in that time frame" is an exceptional circumstance, so probably not. Nearly 300 people have voiced their support already, and only a very few have actually changed their vote because of this. (including the person who asked about it, who from what I can tell went from support, to neutral, back to support, and finally to "regretful" oppose) A number of supporters have also re-affirmed their support.
information is not knowledge, knowledge is not wisdom

User avatar
Trismic
Critic
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 5:59 pm
Actual Name: Tristan

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Trismic » Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:31 pm

Beeblebrox wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:21 pm
Trismic wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:06 pm
What would happen if near the end, there was a clear trend of opposition going right into closing time that would have brought the support% into discretionary range? Would the rfa be extended to allow more in the community to comment?
Well, as usual, we have a somewhat vague rule: "In exceptional circumstances, bureaucrats may extend RfAs beyond seven days or restart the nomination to make consensus clearer. " I don't personally think that "someone brought this up five days ago (by the time it is ripe for closing) and there might be more people who haven't dropped by in that time frame" is an exceptional circumstance, so probably not. Nearly 300 people have voiced their support already, and only a very few have actually changed their vote because of this. (including the person who asked about it, who from what I can tell went from support, to neutral, back to support, and finally to "regretful" oppose) A number of supporters have also re-affirmed their support.
Yet, new people are still coming out to vote. There are more than 300 registered people in the community (even when you take into account the probable sock voting going on).

User avatar
Beefsoup
Contributor
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2022 10:32 am

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Beefsoup » Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:49 pm

Down to 89% now, damn. She'll still pass, but it may provide enough of an asterisk on her RfA to keep her from using her admin tools anywhere near American politics, which I suppose the opposers could chalk up as a win.

User avatar
Trismic
Critic
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 5:59 pm
Actual Name: Tristan

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Trismic » Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:58 pm

Beefsoup wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:49 pm
Down to 89% now, damn. She'll still pass, but it may provide enough of an asterisk on her RfA to keep her from using her admin tools anywhere near American politics, which I suppose the opposers could chalk up as a win.
In legitimate terms, it’s more like 88%-ish. I always support sock vote 2-3 times on every RfA.

User avatar
Scorpions13256
Now living on a nice farm upstate
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2021 7:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Scorpions13256

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Scorpions13256 » Fri Apr 29, 2022 5:10 pm

I'm still not opposing.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31489
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Vigilant » Fri Apr 29, 2022 7:10 pm

PinkAmpersand was/is a shithead who played in the SJW space.

I never saw a contribution of theirs to the drama boards that didn’t make things worse.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Bezdomni
Habitué
Posts: 2935
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:07 pm
Wikipedia User: RosasHills
Location: Monster Vainglory ON (.. party HQ ..)
Contact:

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Bezdomni » Fri Apr 29, 2022 8:47 pm

I'm a bit surprised nobody's opposed over her getting Manchester confused with Marseille (§) in #7. :XD
los auberginos

User avatar
Trismic
Critic
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 5:59 pm
Actual Name: Tristan

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Trismic » Fri Apr 29, 2022 11:59 pm

With the switching back to support, one could be forgiven for assuming people are being urged off-wiki to amend their votes. Not sure how appropriate that is.

User avatar
Scorpions13256
Now living on a nice farm upstate
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2021 7:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Scorpions13256

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Scorpions13256 » Sat Apr 30, 2022 12:28 am

Nah, I'm just the most indecisive person who has ever lived.

User avatar
Trismic
Critic
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 5:59 pm
Actual Name: Tristan

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Trismic » Sat Apr 30, 2022 12:57 am

Scorpions13256 wrote:
Sat Apr 30, 2022 12:28 am
Nah, I'm just the most indecisive person who has ever lived.
lol I should have specified everyone but you.

User avatar
Dennis Brown
Gregarious
Posts: 568
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 2:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Dennis Brown
Actual Name: Dennis Brown
Location: Lexington, North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Dennis Brown » Sat Apr 30, 2022 1:41 am

Accidentally ran across this RFA, had to oppose. I have no use for Trump, (nor most politicians) but this is so far over the line. Admin have to deal with everyone, theoretically in an even handed manner, and I can't see this person acting as an admin in any political articles, not in a fair manner.
“I'd far rather be happy than right any day.” - Douglas Adams
"My patience is formidable.... But it is not infinite." - Scorpius (Farscape)

User avatar
Midsize Jake
Site Admin
Posts: 9872
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:10 pm
Wikipedia Review Member: Somey

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Midsize Jake » Sat Apr 30, 2022 3:41 am

Dennis Brown wrote:
Sat Apr 30, 2022 1:41 am
Accidentally ran across this RFA, had to oppose. I have no use for Trump, (nor most politicians) but this is so far over the line. Admin have to deal with everyone, theoretically in an even handed manner, and I can't see this person acting as an admin in any political articles, not in a fair manner.
It's not really "over the line" — I'd go with something more like "toes the line." The thing you have to remember is that Trump is so corrosive and generates so much hate and disgust that you can't legitimately pretend it's "normal," or that the traditional rules of political bias-avoidance still apply, or that he and his supporters don't represent a legitimate (if not existential) threat to civil society, and maybe even to Wikipedia itself in the form of future legislation designed to "kneecap" it along with other Big Tech entities. Because if you do pretend those things, people will just assume you're one of them, because those things are what they pretend.

But you say you aren't one of them, so I should give you the benefit of the doubt, right? Though it's not like I know you personally.

User avatar
Trismic
Critic
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 5:59 pm
Actual Name: Tristan

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Trismic » Sat Apr 30, 2022 4:19 am

I don’t know how to embed YouTube videos, ah well.

extcord
Contributor
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2021 2:03 am

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by extcord » Sat Apr 30, 2022 6:06 am

I do find the following comment from an RfA supporter enlightening (it was moved to the talk page later)
Kaleeb18 wrote:I will say though I am a Trump supporter and Tamzin was never rude or mean to me. With the few encounter I’ve had with her, she seemed nice to me.
(diff)

It's not like Kaleeb is quiet about being a Trump supporter; he's had User:UBX/Trump Supporter (T-H-L) on his userpage since the first non-OSed revision. I guess it should be noted that this comment was before the majority of politics-based opposes came in, but I doubt there's any evidence that the candidate's editing has ever actually been affected by politics (rather than obvious hypotheticals). Certainly none of the opposers are putting any effort into finding any such cases.

User avatar
Captain Occam
Gregarious
Posts: 886
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:08 am

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Captain Occam » Sat Apr 30, 2022 9:47 am

extcord wrote:
Sat Apr 30, 2022 6:06 am
It's not like Kaleeb is quiet about being a Trump supporter; he's had User:UBX/Trump Supporter (T-H-L) on his userpage since the first non-OSed revision. I guess it should be noted that this comment was before the majority of politics-based opposes came in, but I doubt there's any evidence that the candidate's editing has ever actually been affected by politics (rather than obvious hypotheticals). Certainly none of the opposers are putting any effort into finding any such cases.
I think when admins allow themselves to be influenced by political bias, most of the time they don't make it obvious. There's nearly always some other justification that can be given when blocking an editor whose politics they don't like: "that user has displayed a battleground attitude", "that user was pushing a POV", etc. The way to detect the presence of bias is if they consistently look the other way about the same behavior from editors whose politics they agree with.

User avatar
greyed.out.fields
Gregarious
Posts: 873
Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 10:59 am
Wikipedia User: I AM your guilty pleasure
Actual Name: Written addiction
Location: Back alley hang-up

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by greyed.out.fields » Sat Apr 30, 2022 12:18 pm

Hmm. "neurodivergent" appears to be used as a synonym of "insufferably smug" here:
User_talk:Blaze_Wolf/Archive_4#A_friendly_word (T-H-L)
a cien años de soledad no tenían una segunda oportunidad en la tierra

User avatar
Bezdomni
Habitué
Posts: 2935
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:07 pm
Wikipedia User: RosasHills
Location: Monster Vainglory ON (.. party HQ ..)
Contact:

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Bezdomni » Sat Apr 30, 2022 12:57 pm

Beeblebrox wrote:
Tue Apr 26, 2022 4:47 pm
Well, this looks certain to sail through. 5 days to go, 179 supports, only 3 opposes, none of which are compelling.
Currently at 286/64/6.

1st 40 hours: 98.3% (179/3)
subsequent 4 days: 63.7% (107/61)

net: 82%

It can't be stressed enough how important it is to get the voters out early!
nableezy wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:09 pm
Trismic wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2022 4:06 pm
What would happen if near the end, there was a clear trend of opposition going right into closing time that would have brought the support% into discretionary range? Would the rfa be extended to allow more in the community to comment?
Somebody would surely tweet THE POLES ARE CLOSED and that would be that.

Yes, at 2:19am, come hell or high water, it's time to POLISH OFF the c(h)ampagne & UP the ballot boxes!
los auberginos

User avatar
Ritchie333
Gregarious
Posts: 537
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:20 pm
Wikipedia User: Ritchie333
Location: London, broadly construed

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Ritchie333 » Sat Apr 30, 2022 3:55 pm

It'll probably still pass. There's only about 400 people interested in RfA, so I can't see anything more than 50 more opposes, which still puts it in the upper bound of the discretionary zone. Actually, it would be interesting to see what a 'crat chat makes of all this.

User avatar
Ritchie333
Gregarious
Posts: 537
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:20 pm
Wikipedia User: Ritchie333
Location: London, broadly construed

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Ritchie333 » Sat Apr 30, 2022 4:00 pm

Dennis Brown wrote:
Sat Apr 30, 2022 1:41 am
Accidentally ran across this RFA, had to oppose. I have no use for Trump, (nor most politicians) but this is so far over the line. Admin have to deal with everyone, theoretically in an even handed manner, and I can't see this person acting as an admin in any political articles, not in a fair manner.
But they don't. Anyone defacing the main page with a picture of a penis gets kicked off the site instantly, and rightly so. I remember declining Raquel Baranow (T-C-L) an unblock because they were a Holocaust-denying nut job. Sometimes, you have to not say "Okay, your viewpoint that non-white people have no place in society, that's an interesting viewpoint, let's chat and respect your views", you have to say "Get the hell off this site you racist scumbag".

User avatar
Trismic
Critic
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 5:59 pm
Actual Name: Tristan

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Trismic » Sat Apr 30, 2022 7:18 pm

Ritchie333 wrote:
Sat Apr 30, 2022 3:55 pm
It'll probably still pass. There's only about 400 people interested in RfA, so I can't see anything more than 50 more opposes, which still puts it in the upper bound of the discretionary zone. Actually, it would be interesting to see what a 'crat chat makes of all this.
I have to imagine that a ‘crat chat should apply less weight to support !votes amounting to “net positive would make a good admin” that have not been reaffirmed in light of the current direction of discussion, with the vast majority of opposes now having been thought out, articulated, discussed, and explicitly supported by a plurality of well-respected administrators and other veteran editors. You’ll notice that after Cullen and a few others stepped in, the partisan badgering of opposes has finally tapered down to nil.

I guess if you wanted to make sure that a ‘crat chat goes in favor of the candidate, you could urge each and every three-word support voter to reaffirm (but I think that goes against canvassing policy). I’m sure there is widespread off-wiki canvassing going on anyway, though, given the recent oppose vote reversals to neutral etc.

User avatar
Captain Occam
Gregarious
Posts: 886
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:08 am

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Captain Occam » Sat Apr 30, 2022 8:25 pm

I'd be interested to know whether Tamzin's comments about treating people differently based on their politics apply only to political views those editors have expressed on-Wiki, or whether it also applies to views they've expressed on Twitter, Facebook, etc. if those can be connected to their Wikipedia account. I've seen it argued before that Wikipedia editors can be judged based on views they've expressed off-Wiki, but only with respect to views that are much more extreme than being a Trump supporter.

User avatar
hako9
Contributor
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:56 am
Wikipedia User: hako9
Location: Room 101

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by hako9 » Sat Apr 30, 2022 9:21 pm

I wonder if the same special courtesy and red carpet treatment that has been shown to Tamzin would be shown to a candidate who ran saying anyone continues to be a Bush supporter should be desysoped because in their view Bush is an oppressor and war mongerer.

Populations dont like wars. They have to be fooled into wars.


User avatar
Trismic
Critic
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 5:59 pm
Actual Name: Tristan

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Trismic » Sat Apr 30, 2022 10:24 pm

hako9 wrote:
Sat Apr 30, 2022 9:21 pm
I wonder if the same special courtesy and red carpet treatment that has been shown to Tamzin would be shown to a candidate who ran saying anyone continues to be a Bush supporter should be desysoped because in their view Bush is an oppressor and war mongerer.
:welcome:

Such a person would probably also fare well in RfA.

User avatar
hako9
Contributor
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:56 am
Wikipedia User: hako9
Location: Room 101

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by hako9 » Sat Apr 30, 2022 11:13 pm

And what about a candidate who says Obama is an oppressor and his supporters should be desysoped because his administration was responsible for the indiscriminate drone killings of thousands in Yemen, Somalia, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Or what about Biden whose administration is supplying weapons to Saudis to fuel the worst humanitarian crisis in Yemen?

Combine all the supporters of all the presidents and you'll have none left.

But I guess Trump supporters deserve a special hate.

Populations dont like wars. They have to be fooled into wars.


User avatar
Trismic
Critic
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 5:59 pm
Actual Name: Tristan

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Trismic » Sat Apr 30, 2022 11:22 pm

hako9 wrote:
Sat Apr 30, 2022 11:13 pm
But I guess Trump supporters deserve a special hate.
On Wikipedia, they do. And 301 (as of now) registered users have no problem with that. A substantial proportion of those 301 actively applaud it.

User avatar
hako9
Contributor
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:56 am
Wikipedia User: hako9
Location: Room 101

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by hako9 » Sat Apr 30, 2022 11:34 pm

A great man once said, don't take refuge in the false security of consensus.

Populations dont like wars. They have to be fooled into wars.


User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31489
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Vigilant » Sat Apr 30, 2022 11:42 pm

Given their statements, the Tools should come with an indefinite topic ban from American politics, broadly construed.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Trismic
Critic
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 5:59 pm
Actual Name: Tristan

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Trismic » Sat Apr 30, 2022 11:47 pm

Vigilant wrote:
Sat Apr 30, 2022 11:42 pm
Given their statements, the Tools should come with an indefinite topic ban from American politics, broadly construed.
The rationale that “if an admin needs to be restricted, then they shouldn’t be an admin” has been applied in a few recent Arbcom desysoppings. Should they have the tools at all?

User avatar
Scorpions13256
Now living on a nice farm upstate
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2021 7:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Scorpions13256

Re: Tamzin RfA

Unread post by Scorpions13256 » Sun May 01, 2022 12:18 am

If it turns out that she is not capable of being impartial, someone can take her to arbcom. Based on my experiences with her (including a time where she admitted that her side was wrong), I see little reason to worry. However, I would have opposed her had she not been active in SPI and RM.

I'm right-wing BTW.

Locked