Page 1 of 1

Star Chambers

Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2019 10:53 am
by Graaf Statler
I quote from Wikipedia.

Wikipedia wrote:The Star Chamber (Latin: Camera stellata) was an English court which sat at the royal Palace of Westminster, from the late 15th century to the mid-17th century (c. 1641), and was composed of Privy Counsellors and common-law judges, to supplement the judicial activities of the common-law and equity courts in civil and criminal matters. The Star Chamber was originally established to ensure the fair enforcement of laws against socially and politically prominent people so powerful that ordinary courts would probably hesitate to convict them of their crimes. However, it became synonymous with social and political oppression through the arbitrary use and abuse of the power it wielded.

And how did it end up?

Wikipedia wrote:Under the Stuarts

The power of the Court of Star Chamber grew considerably under the House of Stuart, and by the time of King Charles I, it had become synonymous with misuse and abuse of power by the King and his circle. King James I and his son Charles used the court to examine cases of sedition, which meant that the court could be used to suppress opposition to royal policies. It came to be used to try nobles too powerful to be brought to trial in the lower court.

And how were Star Chambers viewed in later century's?

Edgar Lee Masters wrote:In the Star Chamber the council could inflict any punishment short of death, and frequently sentenced objects of its wrath to the pillory, to whipping and to the cutting off of ears. ... With each embarrassment to arbitrary power the Star Chamber became emboldened to undertake further usurpation. ... The Star Chamber finally summoned juries before it for verdicts disagreeable to the government, and fined and imprisoned them. It spread terrorism among those who were called to do constitutional acts. It imposed ruinous fines. It became the chief defence of Charles against assaults upon those usurpations which cost him his life.

"Der Process" form Franz Kafka wrote:Jemand mußte Josef K. verleumdet haben, denn ohne daß er etwas Böses getan hätte, wurde er eines Morgens verhaftet.

2019, Wikipedia.

While we are reviewing WMF bans

The SanFranBan of BrillLyle also stinks to high heaven. But hey, who's paying attention, if she got banned by WMF due to an anonymous well-connected complainant or two without due process, the ban must be right, because, you know, they never make mistakes or engage in petty political backstabbing. Carrite (talk) 22:25, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

By "stinks to high heaven" you mean nobody knows why she was banned, because nobody can know, because the T&S policy forbids telling anyone about the standards, evidence, complaints, assessments, or recommendations involved? EllenCT (talk) 08:04, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Re: Star Chambers

Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2019 10:08 am
by Graaf Statler
Timmy Tim wrote:I propose we move shortly to a reexamination of the, which also stinks of power-player steamrolling of an easily-forgivable, if not blameless victim...

Come on, Timmy, it all cherry picking what you and your friend Vigilant are doing. This Star Chamber victim I like so that ban was wrong, but I don't like him (Statler) so that sanFanBan was justified. Without even knowing where that global ban is given for.

By the way, didn't you know BrillLyle has killed 10 man (properly 12) from the New York chapter, choped them in pieces and has roasted them in Central Park on a grill and eat them all together with Laura Hale? That was the real reason of her ban! And did you know the ban of Fram is just a revenge for the BrillLyle SanFranBan for this reason?
Yes, all true. And Romaine had been there next victim but they got a fight with the chairman of the French chapter who should eat him. Yeh, that is what happend. Of course a useless fight about such a skinny guy. Alexander they had to take, that had been tasteful and enough meat for all roasted on his new grill.

Look yourself, here is the evidence, they even has hacked his Twitter: ... 1123999745

How much nonsense do we have to hear from you and Vig before the two of you grow up, Timmy boy?

Re: Star Chambers

Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2019 7:56 am
by Graaf Statler
mendaliv wrote:And the complete shithouse that WP:FRAM has devolved into is now trying every way it can to deny the fact that WMF confirmed to the media that they banned Fram for incivility. That goddamn story has been out two weeks already and not a single statement out of WMF contradicting it or claiming their statement was misrepresented.

For fuck's sakes you could probably get past a motion to dismiss with this evidence.

No mister lawyer, you can't. WMF can mention every reason they want to the press as long it is true. Or even not any. Or do you want to claim Fram has not been uncivil? And was not breaking the ToU in this way?

Not a change mister Lawyer. The English community is hit by what they like themself so much, Star Chambers.
Opaque accusations, secret courts.
Acting like hopping around overcaffeinated and screaming monkey's on Wikipedia drama boards what Vig and Jake are doing is no evidence, mister lawyer.

Re: Star Chambers

Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:34 am
by CrowsNest
It's tedious. No way can he be an actual lawyer. For a start, since when does a press release trump internal statements? Is there some impact on the stock market to FRAMBAN that I have missed? Second, what will it take before they realize WP:HARASS is defined as a specific form of WP:INCIVILITY, a form that Fram is pretty clearly guilty of. There is no contradiction, a ban for harassment is a ban for incivility, just not mere incivility. Legally speaking, I guess if it helps pseudo-lawyers get their heads around it, they can call it aggravated incivility. But you really do have to be a brain dead moron to think the WMF seriously banned Fram for merely being direspectful, with no harassment component (or hounding component, if you disagree with the interpretation of evidence). You can tell that plain incivility clearly isn't the reason, because that is what Fram is claiming is the reason, and if he wasn't a born fantasist when it comes to bearing witness to his own failings, he wouldn't be in this situation.

Re: Star Chambers

Posted: Fri Jul 12, 2019 12:43 pm
by Graaf Statler
Carcharoth wrote:Incidentally, this may explain why the WMF didn't go for a full SANFRANBAN. They may have held back because it would have looked even worse when it all eventually came out. Though surely someone should have put the brakes on everything due to the incredibly bad perceptions it creates.

When does it come to your minds the situation is already very bad with all those Wiki Star Chambers and SanFanBan's and name and shame lists under a CC licences? Just after the Abd law case and the law cases what follows?
What have you guys told the Jones lawyers. Never mind, paddo Vigilant does a few stoned monkey dances in the court room and Legal Bart produces tons of shit emails, the result of years solide troll work?

And, what did that Jones lawyer say?
O, thats fine and don't forget to take Jan Eißfeldt and wiki lawyer mendaliv with you, and don't forget a a shrieking crowd in the cord room waving with pirate flags? And Timmy Tim on the background: Judge, judge, listen to them! Jury, this is all very relevant!

You know what you guys are? Complete mataglap and just find yourself out what that means.

Re: Star Chambers

Posted: Fri Jul 12, 2019 4:29 pm
by CrowsNest
Carcharoth is strangely uninformed, for someone who is making it their mission of get the Wikipedians to properly document their outrage about FRAMBAN. A pointless mission, of course.

Re: Star Chambers

Posted: Fri Jul 12, 2019 4:38 pm
by CrowsNest
You missed the best part.....
Kiefer is right, Jimmy Wales absolutely does need to answer questions about what he knew and when (though maybe the question should be put to all Board members). Though María Sefidari does need to answer questions as well. I am still unsure how and where to put those questions. Her en-Wikipedia user page does not even mention that she is WMF Chair (though her meta page does). There is a lone user talk page question over at her meta talk page.
That's Carcharoth, a former Wikipedia Arbitrator, acting like he doesn't know what the best way is to ask the Foundation Board if they are corrupt.

Send an email, you douchebag.

The only reason he is confused, is he wants to find the venue with maximum smear/drama potential. The answers to the questions don't matter. The fuck is he even going to ask that hasn't already been answered?

A true Wikipediocracy member.

Re: Star Chambers

Posted: Fri Jul 12, 2019 5:01 pm
by Graaf Statler
What? A former Wikipedia Arbitrator? There lack of self-knowledge is real shocking.

I was the architect of the "new" Wikiquote-NL after Mdd, Romaine/De Wikischim and a few other messed it total up. But I understood myself I simple didn't had the qualities to be the leading sysop or a sysop at all, so I asked Whaledad. And I have to say it was a excellent choice. Despite the sabotage of these guy's together with Wikipedia Arb for ever Vinvlugt it is still a acceptable project..

You can't give the complex Wikipedia in the hands of just some populair random users, that is complete insane. Because of the complete self-overestimation of the participants, they simple doesn't recognise there own limitations.