Re: 'Paddo Vigilant' wrote something - again
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 11:44 am
Lordy lord.....
Poor little mute that he is.
You're (still) an embarrassment.The Fram arbitration is breaking new ground:
* An unprecedented, out of process one year ban from en.wp
Not without precedent nor out of process - this specific process having been used in de.wiki, a project with as much if not more claim to be able to run its own affairs without WMF intervention.
* Secret evidence that the defendant and public can't see
Not remotely unprecedented. Standard procedure even.
* A mass uprising
On a similar scale to the uprisings seen against Pending Changes and Super Protect
* The Board forcing the WMF to backoff
Possibly the only unprecedented act here, but how would you really verify that? Especially given the bullshit conspiracy theories you think are the norm.
* Along delay to the start of the process
It would be unprecedented if any aspect of en.wiki Arbitration went according to published deadlines.
* The respondent banned and prevented from posting his own defense
Standard procedure for global bans, this ban having merely been a variant of such. So not remotely unprecedented, and frankly absolutely fucking generous.
* The complainant "retired" and vanished
Happens all the time. A byproduct of en.wiki not being remotely capable of or even willing to stop bloodthirsty mobs out for revenge. They didn't even say a word as en.wiki Administrators teamed up with the scumbags on your forum.
* An evidence stage with virtually no evidence
You really do need to start watching Wikipedia closely. Not remotely unheard of.
* Partial leaks of the super secret T&S dossier
Both the Foundation and en.wiki have leaked before. The weak link is always the same - en.wiki Administrators are simply untrustworthy.
* An arb repeatedly attempting to add evidence after the evidence phase closed
As above, start watching Wikipedia more closely.
* An admission by an arb that the secret evidence and the paltry public evidence are functionally the same
Perhaps a precedent. Hardly matters. Where's the surprise supposed to be in learning that this was a case of the staff and the community having a different interpretation of the same events?
* The closing of the workshop phase with no agreement on what has actually happened to precipitate the crisis
Standard procedure. Divisive issues like Eric Corbett routinely see the Committee failing to agree on why they are even examining an issue, ever after closing the case. The precedent being set here, will be that people are actually expecting them to make a decision, and anything they do is a decision, even if it is to do nothing.
Poor little mute that he is.