Fram

[Graaf Statler]

To put it bluntly: th)e WMF's T&S staff is the most incompetent body of people I have come across in my 30+ on the net. (Personally: after receiving literally thousands of death & rape threats here: I have suggested 3 easy improvements for the safety of community (and me!): none have ever been acted upon). I have totally given up on T&S: I have no trust in them, and they bring us no safety. And just while we are not yet finished with their latest spectacular failure (The Framban), they want to formalise rules to give them the rights to commit further blunders. (<facepalm/>) What could possibly go wrong? (<sarcasm/>) Huldra (talk) 21:32, 16 July 2019 (UTC

O, I have had about the same threats with a email account special made with my real name in it and a description of my house. Nice villa you have. I am sorry but I have all my life worked hard to reach that. We will break bones. Business as usual. And of course a letter of the lawyer of the Dutch chapter. I had to shut up otherwise they should start a trail. After one mail with the treat of a countersue, no, no, no, after talking with the chairman and the director they withdrawn there claim. What a pity, a new expensive car like they have for free at the extra's is always welcome. The bloody fools.

And for the rest is Huldra of course 100% right. These overpaid shitty "Safety Experts" are just a bunch of incompetent and corrupt jokers. And as toxic as hell themself.
And the most expensive department ever. Because, if they had consulted me I had told them the same as Fram did. I had told them the whole pirate mission was useless and a total spoiling of donor money. That the whole Wikidata adventure by the technical lady's in this form was also a complete spoiling of money, just as Fram claimed and Erica did.

Because the idea of Wikidata is an sich not bad, far from, but to fill it up with Sui generis database right protected crap is indeed rather safe, but nonsens. And the reason for this safety is it is such a immense crap no one will ever start a trail for it. Because it is unreliable junk and rubbish and who should spend one euro or dollar on that.
But how much donor money is spilled in these three years I am put aside by Trolling &Sucking because I should be a psychotic, a drug addicted and alcohol addicted wreak, rejected by my noble family and being bankrupt? Or just dead according to MyGenealogy ? I think millions and millions all togehter.

[CrowsNest]

Isn't it great, this autonomous self-government business? You can say any old nasty shit, and nobody does nothing......

I would not hold my breath waiting for Jimbo. He probably agrees with the greater social goal, and the flow of money to favoured individuals and groups. It's consistent with what T&S is doing, both ways it is a heavy thumb on one side of the scales in favour of another LH against another Fram.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:20, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

First they harass her into vanishing. Now she's a meme.

Nothing worse than cowardly referring to someone in a way that makes it seem like you don't want to further draw attention to them, when in reality everyone you are talking to knows who you mean.

Oh, and of course, this was said by a Wikipedia Administrator, on another Administrator's talk page. But you'd already realized that was probably going to be the case, right?

TOXIC SHITHOLE. a.k.a, the English Wikipedia community.

[CrowsNest]

Community......

I didn't attend Wikimania when it was held ten minutes from my house. As you say, I have a better use for both my time and for the entrance fee. (If admission had been free I might have popped my head in to put faces to names.) ‑ Iridescent 13:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

This is English Wikipedia community, Trust & Safety people. This guy specifically, is like their REAL Jimmy Wales.

They don't, and never will, give a shit about any single thing the Foundation does, unless it is bad. And the common assumption is, everything they do, is bad.

You are not their partners, not their colleagues, not their friends.

The only concept of a shared movement they recognize here, is the collective bowel movement they would like to deposit into your mouths.

You are nothing to these people but an enemy. An inconvenience at best, but mostly, an enemy.

They only let you pay for the servers because they're too cowardly to go it alone.

They only let you collect the donor money and ban child predators and because, well, that's a job for grown ups, right?

What stupid ass mother-fucker thought it would be a good idea to giving any kind of concession to these selfish ungrateful scumbags?

Should have just let them starve. They are like rats.

[CrowsNest]

Oh wow......

.......It's not right that when someone trying to uphold basic ethical values challenges an outright crook the result is the person trying to uphold values being punished while the crook is allowed to quietly vanish and slink away and those who protected her keep their positions, but trying to impose a code of ethics when the most unethical people are those at the top is always going to be a fool's errand.

One lesson I have taken away from Framageddon is that the underlying issue isn't just one of different priorities, but that when it comes to Wikipedia the True Believers literally have a different worldview to everybody else. In the immediate aftermath of the Fram incident I had a lengthy correspondence with someone at the WMF (the five point summary I made last week originally came from it), which I eventually completely gave up on and stopped responding when every single comment of mine was met with some variation on "but Jan Eissfeldt/Sydney Poore/Katherine Maher says so and they can't possibly be wrong because they're perfect". I've no doubt at all that the person I was speaking to wasn't stonewalling but genuinely did believe this, and couldn't understand why I, and everyone else, could possibly be disputing a decision if the Politburo had approved it.
........
Iridescent 15:59, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Have you perhaps considered they simply don't think what Fram was doing was remotely "upholding basic ethical values" or that what Hale was doing was criminal?

No, or course you haven't. You're just the absolute supercunt who is a Wikipedia Administrator simply by virtue of the fact Wikipedia is such a toxic shithole you can literally accuse named individuals of criminal conduct, and nobody does anything. Self-government in action.

[CrowsNest]

We are still working on the details of how to conduct the case, how to gather and analyse evidence, how to seek clarification and context from witnesses, and how to involve Fram, while allowing those involved the privacy and safety they would need in order to feel confident in talking to ArbCom (particularly after the speculation that occured on the WP:Fram page in which the private lives of two individuals were exposed and negatively discussed which will have had a chilling effect on others coming forward - emotions were running high, true, but we should make certain that we never allow such behaviour to occur again, as it has real life consequences for the people involved, and a damaging impact on Wikipedia moving forward). ..... SilkTork (talk) 10:29, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but ArbCom has literally just ruled 'no decision' regarding the two Administrators and one Bureaucrat who abused their tools precisely because they didn't believe (or more likely didn't care) about the likely consequences on those two people of giving out the message they were fair game.

Any misgivings people have about coming froward, is on your shoulders. The community are off the hook because they don't know any better. All they have are rules that say don't be scum. It is ArbCom's job to teach them what these rules mean in practice. You have so taught.

You dropped the ball. Just like you dropped the ball regarding Fram.

Your collective determination that "exceptional circumstances" excuses the worst abuses by your most trusted users, virtually guarantees that nobody is safe from what the Wikipedia mob is truly capable of, in collaboration with their bin-diving cousins at Wikipediocracy. The Foundation needs to start giving up IP addresses to law enforcement, that's what it will take to make them think twice.

I advise every single editor who has any part of their real life attached to their account, who doesn't accept the vox populi that Fram is innocent, to just leave now. You will be targeted eventually. As the absentee bosses of Wikipedia's toxic Administrators, ArbCom will throw you under the bus without a second's thought.

They're going to unban Fram and tell the community a bunch of hooey about Principles that they will have dismissed seconds after reading them. This is how Arbitration Cases work on Wikipedia. They already have something like fifty cases which all say, hey, community, don't be assholes. Do they ever listen?

The rot started in the basement, with the editors with the darkest hearts and blackest souls, who became unblockable because of their addiction to Wikipedia. But slowly and inexorably, it worked its way up to the very top. It's scientific name is Opabina Regalis. As her followers are saying.......

We are working on developing a product, not merely talk at each other (Opabinia regalis said something about this a while ago if memory serves), assessing the quality of contributions is important......

Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:21, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

The doctrine of Fair Game. Before you protect someone, ye shall consider, are they worth protecting? Before you sanction someine, first you must consider, are they too valuable to sanction? Even if that is not what she said, it's understandable how they might think it is what she means, given how she participates in Arbitration Cases. Has she ever even read a Wikipedia policy? Seriously, test her knowledge of what is and is not Wikipedia policy, see if she can get even 50%.

[CrowsNest]

I would add that in my limited dealings with Fram, I have gotten the sense that they struggle even to understand the other side's point. Hopefully that characteristic is left at the door during this process. AGK ■ 10:55, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Gee.

If only Wikipedia had some kind of system that screened people and prevented them from becoming Administrators if they lacked a basic competence like listening. And if only Wikipedia had a system of governance that effectively removed such people if they somehow manage to fool the screening process.



They knew Fram was unfit to serve. They dropped the ball.

[CrowsNest]

There has been a culture in response to this ban of "Find the Victim so we can blame them", and an assumption that this is one or two reports combined with a lack of knowledge of the community norms. As I said above, the document is hefty, nuanced and there appears to have been a significant number of reports. Building a conspiracy theory around one potential involved party and then speculating on their personal lives, on and off wiki, passing this to the press and so on... well, I expect better of this community. WormTT(talk) 12:06, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

How long is it going to take for the penny to drop?

The entire reason so many people went to Trust & Safety and not the almighty autonomous self-governing community's own dispute resolution systems, is because they have learned that expecting anything better of the community is ridiculous. They saw you drop the ball, over and over again. Now they see you being given the ball, again. They know you're going to drop it again. It is what you people do. Some by accident and with the best of intentions, sure, but others, not so much, and transparently so.

[CrowsNest]

Personally, I am still confused what the Fram ban tells me about how I should approach prolific good-faith volunteers whose competence isn't quite up to the task they have chosen to volunteer for. Many of the cases where I am aware of conflicts with Fram are of this type. The not so competent volunteer often feels that the admin checking on their edits is their personal opponent. This kind of situations is difficult to handle in a way that both protects the quality of the encyclopaedia and the dignity of the contributor. Very often they give up and leave after a while, or the conflict escalates or gets even more personalised and they end up blocked. My own actions have contributed to several people leaving. Does the Fram ban tell me I have been adminning wrong? —Kusma (t·c) 13:10, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

You shouldn't even be an Administrator. Referring to people as "not so competent" is a pretty big clue you have literally no idea how to treat people with dignity.

It's an institutional problem. This guy has been an Administrator since 2006. How?

It should be a basic competence of Wikipedia Administrators to avoid disputes becoming personal, to avoid a user developing the impression they are dealing with a single person, an opponent to be battled.

This happens of course, because so much is left to a single Administrator's interpretation of policy, so they inevitably pursue their interpretation, and it soon ends up with the Administrator treating it like it is their personal responsibility to ensure the user complies.

What is supposed to happen, what the manual says and what a properly performing Administrator would just know, is that they are not alone. They have the entire community they can fall back on if it becomes necessary to convince a user they are misunderstood. Communication and cooperation is key, as has been said multiple times in Arbitration Cases regarding Administrator fuck-ups.

It isn't an accident that so many of Fram's personal crusades ended without their target being locked up, not because he was warned off by Trust & Safety, but because he was forced to accept the community didn't share his interpretation of policy. Sometimes that was for the usual corrupt reasons, such as when he targeted a Vested Contributor, but Fram is a willing part and beneficiary of that corrupt system so he can hardly object when it works against him. But there were also cases when he was simply wrong.

It should never get that far. It did, because the system has been failing to screen out poorly performing Administrators for years. It could even be said there is not a single Administrator who does it correctly, not one who is active in the places where it needs to be done correctly, and at this stage, the Manual is just a myth, a sick trick played on naive users.

[Graaf Statler]

Yeh Crow. Now on page 42 I still come to the same conclusion as before, the extreem primitive wiki system what is systematically overrated by the wiki mangement.
The expectations of self-regulatory and there ambitions are simple much too high. They want to rebuild the Norte Dame with a few I phone pictures. They want artificial intelligence with Edo and Romaine. The want a Caribbean project with Ymnes and Danielle, one of the gender b... sorry lady's and a WIR who trolls her way through wikiland together with gender Elly. (See for many evidences the Dutch section here.)
Altough the University of Oxford has calculated that good research into slavery should cost about a 100 million.
Autistic Sjoerd de B, first a sysop what I never, never could be on Wiki-NL, later a Arb in the commission what trolled me out and again later a Steward. Promoting the total crap Wikidata and travels around the world, now again he travels to Wikimania and he has a WIR job.

Only Whaledad, also a Arb said this isn't good to make this guy a steward. Support, support, support. Trolly trol gender Trijnstel the same story, o, I am a girl! Fantastic! Support support, yes support. And so we can go one and on and on with evidence a self regulating wiki simple doesn't work. Also not if we come in to the trolling &Sucking department of WMF.
A child can see it all stinks as hell and these people will never, never solve anything. But Sloerd, a visiter on Wikimania with a grand of his chapter of course not. And many other cult members there will also not be able to understand where it is about because of there mental defect. And these people have to find the final solution for Trolling&Sucking filled up with lunatics and free loaders. It's complete insane and I really wonder what WMF expects from this "solution"

It is all sooooo soul sucking and depressing, something what could be a nice thing what they are using as a space shuttle to fly to the moon with pilots who have learned flying with there playstations. There is no common sense over there, not any.

[CrowsNest]

"Analysis".

I'd thought that Elisa.Rolle would have been someone who sent a complaint in about Fram. She's going for an unblock now, and this diff from Ritchie333 is interesting:

I am considering this to be a valid application of the standard offer. About a year ago, I was managing the block with TonyBallioni and we agreed to drop it down to a fixed time so we could talk about copyright, before Fram popped in and reblocked indefinitely, causing Elisa to quit the project (and a truck load of off-wiki complaints about Fram landing in my mailbox). I am happy to unblock Elisa; she is a prolific content creator and published author and we need people like her working on the project - and if people find themselves putting {{db-copyvio}} on her work four days after unblocking .... well, blocks are cheap and easy for any admin to do if they know they have consensus between them. Elisa, if you want me to do a standard offer review at AN, respond in the affirmative and I'll get it done. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:45, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Emphasis mine. It seems quite likely that a lot of those complaints also made their way to T&S. More evidence, likely in T&S view, of Fram "hounding" female editors. Arb comments about the dossier they received from T&S (Worm called it a "hefty document") indicate that it goes back a while and contains many complainers, although anonymously. How is it going to be possible to check Fram's side of the story or the actual events if the specifics aren't pointed out? In the cases of Elisa and Laura Hale, Fram was absolutely correct. On Elisa's talk page Megalibrarygirl (T-C-L) is trying to make the case that those who oppose Elisa's unblock should scour diffs and histories to find potential problematic behavior and should then bring that to Elisa for explainations and justifications for why that won't happen again, which is completely backwards from the way it usually is. This is nonsense. Fram was greatly improving the encyclopedia by taking out the trash, and should be unbanned and re-sysop'd immediately.

I told you weeks ago that Ritchie was a far better prime suspect for being the DIRTY RAT than Hale, based on freely available comments just like this. You Wikifuckwits weren't in the slightest bit interested.

Why would people withhold details from from scummy Wikipedia editors like you? Read your own comment. Taking out the trash? I bet a toxic like you cannot even imagine this is exactly the sort of language that resulted in Fram being banned by the responsible adults in the room, and for the immature little children losing their damn minds.

Anyway, the entirely predictable conclusion from #FREEFRAM aside, dare we take this post as an admission from panty-sniffer central that their obsession with Hale was completely unjustified? I'm guessing not. Children don't admit their mistakes. They just move on to telling a different fairy story about how the cat ended up in the food mixer.

Hey Vigilant. You said come at me bro. Well, here I am, calling you a rank amateur, an embarrassment. You still appear to have lost your voice. Do you need Jake's permission to speak or something? I know it can be difficult to properly be yourself on a forum that is trying to fool the world that they're something they're not. Investigate that, ya fucking' mug.

Better yet, just keep posting shit about Hale (indeed, why have you stopped? Jake slapped you down?). Ignore everyone, even your own fellow dirt eaters. You're the only one who knows The Truth.......we're all in on the conspiracy.