ArbCom has the power to topic-ban Doc James?!

Editors, Admins and Bureaucrats Oh my!
Post Reply
User avatar
CMAwatch
Sucks Critic
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2019 1:26 pm
Location: Community Moderation Abuse Watch
Has thanked: 114 times
Been thanked: 31 times

ArbCom has the power to topic-ban Doc James?!

Post by CMAwatch » Wed Jul 29, 2020 4:04 pm

See here:
Doc James is prohibited from making any edits relating to pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing in the article namespace.
But wait, isn't Doc James a member of the board of trustees? The second-highest authoirity in the WMF below that country boy from Alabama?

How can ArbCom have the power to ban Doc James from anything? ArbCom has a lot of power, but surely not as much as the board of trustees, do they?

Side note: Wikipedia relies too heavily on formal prohibitions, because their software is not able to technically selectively blocking users from e.g. moving pages. They added partial (article) bans only in late 2019.
#BbbGate
Weaponizing WP:G5
Oops! Didn't think we'd see? It's right there on WikipediaSucks.co!
ericbarbour wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:22 am
[Wikipedia is] a stupid video game, and the "encyclopedia" is an accidental byproduct.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 2111
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Has thanked: 98 times
Been thanked: 242 times

Re: ArbCom has the power to topic-ban Doc James?!

Post by ericbarbour » Wed Jul 29, 2020 8:00 pm

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

That's part of the "joke" about the Editing Restrictions list; it's full of longtime insiders who lost arguments. Many of WP's worst people AND MOST POWERFUL are listed in that one place "for your convenience".

Remember that: petty slapfights come first and an "encyclopedia" is far down on the list.

Post Reply