Seriously, why are you even opening your yap hole?
To me this was never about Fram's behavior, which is often horrible, but about the super secret backchannel where nobody knows what the rules are and they can just ban you for no reason even if there's no reason the whole situation can't be handled on-wiki.
There never was a need for privacy here, that's just CYA by T&S, I'm sure on the advice of legal. Hopefully in the future if they get such requests/reports tht don't actually involve sensitive material they will refer the reporter back down to community-based processes.
But arbcom is totally sending the wrong message here. They should vacate everything T&S did and invite the community to publicly submit evidence in a new case request if there is still any interest in that
1. That you can be secretly banned, and for no reason at all, is the legal basis of the Global Ban. Nobody knows how it works except the staff who need to know and their expensive lawyers. Nobody else.
2. The need for privacy is obvious. People have harassed the living shit out of those they merely suspect were responsible for the tragedy that is the loss of Fram.
3. Referring people back to the community where appropriate, is standard procedure. It is not standard procedure to do what they did in this case, and the reasons why they chose to do it have been explained at length. In short, the Foundation was satisfied the community didn't have any intention of addressing the behaviour of Fram.
4. Since you seem to accept that Fram's behaviour is "often horrible", what, pray tell, if anything, did you do about it? Don't answer, because it's pretty obvious whatever you did, if anything, was ineffective. Is the whole fucking point.
5. Ha ha ha. A public case about Fram, yeah? People will submit evidence, yeah? Fuck off. The community submitted even less to ArbCom under the protection of confidentiality than was provided to the evil external power. Why? Because every fucker knows the price of putting your name out there, and the fact it would be for nothing, because "often horrible" is considered acceptable by you pieces of shit.
Beeblebrox wrote:That would be the ethical and smart approach, so I suspect they will try everything else.
You're an idiot. Look at you, sucking up to one of the biggest DOESN'T KNOW SHIT wastes of space Administrators on Wikipedia.You're
a critic? Fuck off.