Fram

Editors, Admins and Bureaucrats blecch!
User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Fram

Post by CrowsNest » Mon Jun 24, 2019 9:44 pm

The outrage has only intensified, with approximately a dozen admins resigning. There are 100+ comments at the futile request for arbitration, named for WJBscribe (talk · contribs) who along with Bishonen (talk · contribs) and Floquenbeam (talk · contribs) had the insolence to act against a ban for which no reasonable justification was provided. Jehochman Talk 19:45, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Look how freely Wikipedia Administrators lie their assess off.

In their world, six is "approximately" a dozen, and that same departure from reality applies to "no reasonable justification was provided".

As Wikipedia Administrators have said to victims of their warped system of self-governance for years and years, you were given the reasons, "WP:NOTHERE", you just don't agree with them, or you're just too thick to be editing our beautiful project. Usually quickly followed up with well, fuck off back to Facebook anyway, there's a good chap, and here's a talk page lock.

User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Fram

Post by CrowsNest » Mon Jun 24, 2019 10:05 pm

Here's a way for the WMF to absolutely rat-fuck the rebels, based on their own moronic complaints.

In exchange for them accepting that it should be possible for victims of harassment to file confidential complaints to T&S, and to expect their complaint to be dealt with privately by the WMF, they will give the following concessions....

T&S will adopt the local en.wiki definition of harassment....
pattern of repeated offensive behavior that appears to a reasonable observer to intentionally target a specific person or persons. Usually (but not always), the purpose is to make the target feel threatened or intimidated, and the outcome may be to make editing Wikipedia unpleasant for the target, to undermine, frighten, or discourage them from editing.
...... "offensive behavior" there linking to the list at WP:CIVIL#Identifying incivility, which gives a list which starts at mere "rudeness" and just gets progressively worse.

They will depreciate the concept of partial bans, meaning that even if a user's harassment is considered to be confined to a single project, they will be banned from every project.

They will depreciate the indefinite non-appealable basis of bans, replacing it with the en.wiki system - users will be banned for a minimum of a year, and then may be allowed one appeal every six months, to be submitted to the WMF.

The rebels will reject this proposal, because they know it still ends up with Fram being banned for at least a year. But it does fairly illustrate to observers that it is not really even the process that the locals object to, it is who was investigating, and the inability of the accused to get at the accuser, both being the primary reasons Fram was never brought to heel before now.

User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Fram

Post by CrowsNest » Tue Jun 25, 2019 7:12 am

Oooh. SO close.
Oppose. I think it is inappropriate to seek to affect someone's career in this way. The proposal also blurs the lines of demarcation between community and Office responsibility that we are trying to better delineate. Finally, we are not in a position to evaluate to what extent any particular individual is responsible for any misjudgments that may have been made. That being said, as an attempt at a bit of a fresh start, the WMF might wish to consider asking a different individual to speak on the Office's behalf to the communities on these issues from now on. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:48, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
How about, you might "wish to consider" starting to block some people, because, well, y'know.....
Oppose - Jan has posted as much as he can, or at least as much as he is willing to. I applaud him for his continued efforts to engage with the community in the face of such a shockingly inappropriate reaction on our part - personal attacks, attempted outing of a victim of alleged harassment, and a completely uncompromising attitude. If I were in his position, I would want to interact with such a group as little as possible. It is very reassuring, however, to see the vast majority of the community standing up against this proposal. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 22:22, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Fram

Post by CrowsNest » Tue Jun 25, 2019 7:14 am

Oh dear, feel their pain.....
They didn't give a damn what the community thought when they took action, and took action at dewp, what makes you think they will give a damn what we think now? All I could do is hand in my bit because I don't want to be the mop boy if they want to treat us all as surfs, so that is what I did. They obviously do not care what the community thinks. This has been shown over and over, it is just this time it is slightly more brazen. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 00:34, 25 June 2019 (UTC)






Surf? He meant serf, right? SERF. Not Smurf!

:lol:

User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Fram

Post by CrowsNest » Tue Jun 25, 2019 7:20 am

Yup, sounds like the sort of Wikipedia where Administrators just routinely violate the ToU.......
I request that we keep in mind the value of civility when having tense discussions such as this one, both on wiki and off wiki. I am not saying that we should pretend that everything is okay or that we should be shy about sharing our opinions about WMF's actions. However, I request that we avoid hounding and that we try to be civil to each other in this difficult situation, both on wiki and off wiki. Thank you. --Pine (✉) 03:06, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Kumbaya. People who’ve invested a decade or more of volunteer work feel betrayed. All blame for the consequences rests with those committing the betrayal. The sooner they make reparations, the less collateral damage there will be. It’s real easy. They can just rescind the action against Fram and rescind the changes they snuck through without consulting any of us. Then, we all get together and discuss a path forward as equals, not as master and servant. Jehochman Talk 03:26, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Never has an online community deserved to be ghosted more than this one.

User avatar
Graaf Statler
Side Troll
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: Fram

Post by Graaf Statler » Tue Jun 25, 2019 7:32 am

CrowsNest wrote:Yes, they have the power. And yes, you should be afraid. But no, it really shouldn't blow anyone's mind, BECAUSE IT'S FUCKING OBVIOUS!

What a fucking uncivilised language! :shock:
Be careful the fucking Jan Eissfeldt tool the fucking XLinkBot don't get you and you will no be sucksbanned! :mrgreen:
What a fucking assholes!

User avatar
Graaf Statler
Side Troll
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: Fram

Post by Graaf Statler » Tue Jun 25, 2019 9:39 am

This topic is getting weirder and weirder. Timmy, can you give a explanation, because all of a sudden pops up the name Dirk Beetstra, a Dutch software engineer with lines to Romaine up, and this link described as WMF crap what leads to Jan-Bart de Vreede. It is really a Dutch party this time!

And who is Jan-Bart de Vreede? Well, he is a employer of kennisnet.

Kennisnet wordt gefinancierd door het ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschap (OCW).


And now we get to the real shit, financed by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (Netherlands).

(See for madam Gender's vision on Beetstra here)
Last edited by Graaf Statler on Tue Jun 25, 2019 10:45 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Fram

Post by CrowsNest » Tue Jun 25, 2019 9:51 am

Y'know, I bet if I was trying to purposely hide the fact I was a disgruntled Wikipedian, or a discredited so-called Wikipedia critic, I'd probably do a better job of it than accidentally on purpose calling it Trust & Security, not Trust & Safety, as I went around the interwebs sperging my broken little heart out. Sure, it would probably fool the readers of the target website, but not, as I am hopefully demonstrating, the likely true targets. And if it does, well, as ever, we here stand ready to identify the FAKE ASS WHINEY LITTLE BITCH PUNKS, so they can be disassociated from serious critics.

:roll:

HTD

The Tyranny has spoken.

User avatar
Graaf Statler
Side Troll
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: Fram

Post by Graaf Statler » Tue Jun 25, 2019 10:01 am

CrowsNest wrote: And if it does, well, as ever, we here stand ready to identify the FAKE ASS WHINEY LITTLE BITCH PUNKS, so they can be disassociated from serious critics.

:roll:

HTD

The Tyranny has spoken.

Fucking XLinkBot will get you! :lol:

User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Fram

Post by CrowsNest » Tue Jun 25, 2019 10:32 am

I am fully behind the switching off of XLinkBot.

For a start, something as intrinsically assume bad faith as that piece of shit should never have been approved for a website where assume good faith and don't be an asshole, especially to n00bs, are supposedly their core beliefs.

Second, it is obvious that most Administrators will not be happy to simply let articles be degraded for this hopeless cause, so they will have to pick up the slack, leaving them less time to whine and bitch and moan about a situation they have no business even having an opinion on.

Third, it highlights what an asshole Beetstra is, adding to the pile of evidence that shows the only Administrators protesting Fram's ban with any real gusto, are ones who most fear they will be next. Positively allergic to the idea there are minimum standards, much less that enforcement can be handled outside of the en.wiki bubble.

Oh, and the community process that most people want to have handled Fram? Beetstra has been protesting them for years. ArbCom should be disbanded, he says. Come to think of it, quite a few of these extremists think that too, so, why anyone would negotiate with them about anything, much less on an issue as serious as precisely who inside the Autonomous Republic of Wikistan going to be prosecuting cases like Fram, going forward?

Post Reply