Fram

[Graaf Statler]

The best part so far, to me, is that this whole shit storm has as its foolish progenitor none other than Jimmy Wales' immature temper tantrum.

If Jimmy hadn't fucked Doc James with his pants on, then Maria Sefiardi wouldn't have been appointed to the board and Laura Hale wouldn't have had such a ready made conduit to conduct her mischief against Fram.

And now Jimmy said, not my business. Bad luck, Vig. And are you now willing to tell us why this whole T&S fucking shit upset you so much from the moment on I kicked Bart wikipedia Legal out and Abd started that law case, Vig? Whit as catalyst that FramBan? Was it all your shitty social bot, Vig, or what else?

[CrowsNest]

More boilerplate.

Get your head out your ass you Muppet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =901720996

This was straight up Gold. The "community" just got owned. Proper rat-fucked. Jimmy got on the bat-phone, and all they got was a sorry not sorry and a we'll try and let you know in advance next time we take one of you OUT. In other words, they got nothing. Nothing.

I'm just laughing my ass off that so many of them didn't see this coming a mile off. Or did, but chose to stick their hands in the meat grinder anyway. Some of them probably were just trying to find a way out of their hellish existence.

All that fire and fury about their supposed rights and jurisdiction and all that utterly stupid and downright nasty "feedback", and the end result was merely a restatement of the blindingly obvious legal/organisational/moral/historical situation they have always been in.......

Office Actions are not individually-taken; rather, they are a product of collaboration of multiple people at the Foundation, oftentimes up to and including the Executive Director.

In cases where community influences or barriers interfere with the meeting of .... minimum standards, the Foundation may step in to enforce the standards - even in situations where the local community dislikes or outright opposes those standards.

It is important that victims of hostilities like harassment have a safe place to make reports and that we uphold and respect their privacy when they do so. ..... it is often true that a mere rumor that someone was the victim of harassment can lead to harassment of that person. Unfortunately, that has been proven the case here as some individuals have already made assumptions about the identities of the victims involved.

There have been some concerns raised about the level of community experience and knowledge involved in Trust & Safety’s work. ......We have former ArbCom members, administrators, and functionaries, from English Wikipedia as well as other language communities, informing our decisions, and expertise from other organisations helping to build compassionate best practices. We have utilized all of this experience and expertise in determining how best to manage the reports of harassment and response from members of the community.

One of the recent changes to the Trust & Safety policy is the introduction of new options that include time-limited and partial (project-specific) bans to address serious concerns that are considered temporary or project-specific in nature. This change to policy is not a change of the team’s scope of cases taken. However, it does alter the way that sanctions are enforced and unintentionally introduced ambiguity about the ability of local communities to overrule office actions.

We must stress again that Office Actions, whether “technically” reversible or not, are not to be considered reversible by a local, or even the global, community, no matter the circumstances or community sentiment.

What did I say? THIS. All of this.

Should listen to me, silly rabbits.

The claimed superiority and indeed divine sovereignty of the One True Wiki has always been just so much HORSESHIT. You people listened to Fram for way too long, ironically. You installed a Queen without checking her bloodline. That's commoner muck flowing through her veins, just like all the rest of you. She was just smart enough to make you think you needed or indeed benefited from her divine protection. She can't do shit for you, but you can't dethrone her now either, not unless you want to drop a dime on her.

Some rebellion. There has only ever been one Power, they were just too busy building an Empire to bother with your pissant little Kingdom. Until now.

What are they gonna do now? Nothing. They're addicts.

You only ever had one right. Leave.

You can maybe work with Abd as he takes the WMF to court, try to eke out a better existence for yourselves, one with real legal status that better reflects your obvious desire to be an autonomous territory in federation with the Grand Republic, but you're probably gonna have to make nice to him, and tell Vigilant to go suck a dick, because he 'ain't got your back on that score, no way, no how. Vigilant is all in for the Empire's right to cart any one of you off in the middle of the night and leave your neighborhood wondering if you were a kiddie fiddler or just a plain regular monster.

HTD.

[Graaf Statler]

Thank you for this request, but I think the specifics are misplaced. This is not about individual people, this is a question about our constitutional order. This is not about this specific situation, but a much more important and broader question about project governance.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 06:58, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Your grave in the history will be next to John R. Brinkley, the goat-gland doctor, Jimmy. You wanted the honer to be the sole founder Jimmy of Wikipedia, you will get it.
Trust and Safe. A shitty formal sysop of WP-DE, advised by shitty and corrupt stewards, HA! Or a joker like Alexander. A skilled team. Humorist.

You are a idiot Jimmy with your dream teams with the pirate flags in top. Because that is the best your constitutional order has to offer this world, Jimmy.
And, the history learns us what happens with pirates with the pirate flag in top, Jimmy. They chop there heads off at the end, just like they will chop yours, Jimmy. Just like they did with Brinkley, your grave will be next to him in the American history. And not only in the American in this modern time.

And I am always right with my predictions, Jimmy, I am alway's, I don't know why myself.
So hear the words of the prophet and say never ever I was not warned for a long, long time.

[Graaf Statler]

I think you underestimate the complexity of the situation. If we characterize this as a clash between ArbCom and the WMF, we are factually in error. It's not as easy as that.
And of course, if I were to take a dramatic action, some would cheer, and some would scream. And if I go slow and deliberate, some will not like that, either. But it is my way, the only way that I know, and when I stick to slow and thoughtful deliberation I have learned in my life that the outcome is better than if I do something sudden.
I suppose if I had to decide "whether the community or the foundation is my true heir" I'd go with community. But I actually don't think in that way. My true heir is Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. That's what I think we all care the most about, or anyway it is what we should all care the most about. One of the reasons that Wikipedia has succeeded is that we don't take anything as absolutely permanent. WP:IAR and WP:5P5 spring to mind.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 09:45, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

I suppose if I had to decide "whether the community or the foundation is my true heir" I'd go with community.
But I actually don't think in that way

No? You don't?

My true heir is Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. That's what I think we all care the most about, or anyway it is what we should all care the most about.

I should say put your money where your mouth is, Jimmy. Here is a good start, and I have also a list for you from WP-NL. And stop with telling complete rubbish, you simple have not any backbone, and THAT is you problem, Jimmy! You can't make choices, but now you simple have too do!

[CrowsNest]

He's said some weird shit in his time, but that takes the biscuit.

Wikipedia is an inanimate object. In this fucked up analogy, it is best thought of as the family silver. It is the thing you entrust to your true heir.

And during this whole mess, what happened to this idea that the WMF, which is after all mostly staffed by people who started as and continue to be volunteers in other areas, is part of the community?

If you can believe it, the Wikipedians are now outraged that the person telling them how it is from the Other Place, was an internal hire. A volunteer. As if an external hire is going to tell them what they want to hear - yeah guys, we here at the corporation legally responsible for Wikipedia, are totally fine with you handling everything except child protection. Oh, and btw, if you don't consider yourselves qualified to protect child users from predators, why should we consider you qualified to protect them from other forms of harmful behaviors? Sounds like exactly the way a German with an interest in philosophy would approach this attempted revolt.

[CrowsNest]

Rschen7754 is the latest volunteer Wikipedian who resides at the highest levels of the community with their highest levels of trust, to reveal he has cheese for brains, and it is currently melting.

He's losing his mind at the realization that apparently, now, all you have to do to get someone site-banned from Wikipedia, is convince the WMF they have been guilty of high crimes, like harassment.

First off, let's have it right. James Alexander went on public record a long time ago when the Global Ban was first introduced, that their investigations are done from first principles and are entirely independent of community procedures. So we are already in a situation where people like Abd have been site banned purely because an unnamed complainant somehow managed to convince them they were guilty of high crimes, and we do not know how or why.

He is having to take them to court to know why. His action has already seen the WMF's expensive lawyers reaffirm the position WMF bans are entirely independent investigations, and for good reason - volunteers are surprisingly reluctant to stand up in court as co-defendents against attempts in the real world, to hold them to account. They want to live in a world where they only want to be accountable to themselves.

Second, what the actual fuck? The WMF own the website. Your user contract is with them. On what planet has Wikipedia attained any kind of special status wherein it is considered an outrage that all you have to do to get someone banned from their website, is convince them the user has violated their contractual terms?

All we know is that people like Rschen7754 have been more than happy to enforce these bans before, no questions asked. Just not on this user, a user, I might add, and this takes the absolute fucking biscuit, who in the personal opinion of Rschen7754.....

should have been desysopped and likely banned a while back

Someone did what they're perfectly entitled to do and went directly to the WMF to convince them Fram needed to be banned, precisely because the Wikipedia community is the sort of pace where even though one of their most trusted users says what he said above, somehow, someway, that just doesn't matter.

The WMF's position is clear - that is only happening because large chunks of the Wikipedia community, for reasons no better than they dislike his conclusions, are choosing to ignore the thoughts of Rschen7754, because he is someone who by his own admission, "I come down pretty hard on uncivil behavior." Coming down hard on incivility is the minimum standard required of the WMF, as any one can see from any of their communications. It long ago stopped being the minimal standard of English Wikipedia.

The heart of this problem is seen when Rschen7754 basically admits that he only edits Wikipedia because he hasn't got a wife and kids yet. Well, dude, maybe if you did, you could get your head around complex subjects like this.

Now get to your room, YOU'RE GROUNDED.

[CrowsNest]

SilkTork is another apparent cheese head. He proposes.....

a board with members from the community that are trusted by both the community and the Foundation, working alongside members of the Foundation to hear complaints of civility and harassment. Any sanctions are to be notified via the proposed WMF Noticeboard. Sanctions for harassment to appealed to the Foundation legal dept. Sanctions for civility to be appealed to ArbCom. Members of the Civility/Harassment Board should not also be members of ArbCom to ensure impartially in the appeals process. SilkTork (talk) 09:58, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Um, what part of.....

We have former ArbCom members, administrators, and functionaries, from English Wikipedia as well as other language communities, informing our decisions, and expertise from other organisations helping to build compassionate best practices. We have utilized all of this experience and expertise in determining how best to manage the reports of harassment and response from members of the community.

.....did you not understand?

You people are never going to get what you want. You can hold whatever internal elections you want, establish whatever internal bodies you like, your role will only ever be advisory, and if your advice is fucking stupid, just more of the same nonsense that has seen Fram run from the law this long, it's going to be ignored, and your emissaries likely dismissed.

The WMF has had no input into how English Wikipedia runs its ArbCom, and yet this is the situation you yourself admit the Muppets let develop.....

In the present circumstance where the Foundation informed ArbCom that it had concerns regarding Fram, and then blocked Fram, ArbCom get caught up in an impossible situation. The Committee were informed, but could do nothing with the information. And then when Fram is banned, the Committee are asked by the community about our involvement, and the Committee struggle to articulate clearly what is known. I suppose, by default, ArbCom agreed with and are complicit in the ban by not formally protesting the proposal. But the actual proposal came as part of a wider discussion of other matters during a phone call to one Arb, and it came at a time when the Committee were busy with other matters, and were understaffed. And we were arguing about being understaffed!

You have people all over Wikipedia literally gobbing off about how Fram is innocent, a victim of corruption, and there isn't a trustworthy person in the whole WMF.

Not that you couldn't have guessed, but in January when the matter of Fram's conduct was put before the Arbitration Committee by the community in a full and transparent manner with no private evidence involved, SilkTork's reaction was meh, he's no more than a scamp really.

Only two Arbitrators were prepared to sign off on the already weak finding of.....

Fram is reminded to conduct themselves appropriately when communicating with other editors.

SilkTork was not one of them.

There is zero evidence that any joint committee investigating Vested Administrators like Fram would produce anything other than deadlock, presuming a 50/50 split based on the ludicrous claims people keep making, that the community and the WMF are equals

The cause of all this controversy is obvious. The local interpretation of minimal standards is at odds with the Foundation. One party has legal responsibility for their interpretation, the other presumably would still not even if given this enhanced executive power in the form proposed.

You want a seat at the table, put some skin in the game. If you don't want legal liability as an employee, then joint liability as a volunteer with a codified relationship with the body corporate, can be arranged.

Here in he UK, it works something like this.....

Your charity could get into legal problems if you don’t clearly distinguish between its paid staff and volunteers. It’s possible for volunteers to claim they have the same rights as employees, including claiming unfair dismissal for example.

A written role description for your volunteers can help make it clear what the boundaries and expectations are. It’s important that the role description could not be confused with an employment contract or job description. For example it must not require volunteers to work particular hours.

--------
Arise Trustee, SilkTork.

Wait, what......hey, come back.....you forgot your ceremonial sash!

[CrowsNest]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... get_a_beer

......BF is trying to bait you into misbehavior, for which you can then be reported.....

--Floquenbeam (talk) 22:24, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

No evidence presented for this asccusation, which is being made in defence of a user we know is admired by this Administrator (literally invites him out for a beer in the same breath).

Evidence that it was a gross slur that horrendously mischaracterized events, was instantly available from the public record.....

curprev 22:21, 13 June 2019‎ Britishfinance talk contribs‎ 27,874 bytes -559‎ Undid revision 901732574 by Cassianto (talk); he is only still posting because he is still trying to be helpful in this "crisis"; what are doing seems very disrespectful and at least a violation of WP:GRAVEDANCING. surely this is not your intention? thanks. BF undo Tag: Undo

curprev 22:18, 13 June 2019‎ Cassianto talk contribs‎ 28,433 bytes +559‎ Undid revision 901732332 by Britishfinance (talk)-- the editor has not retired -- see his contributions. And it's not your talk page, so leave alone. Thanks undo Tags: Undo, PHP7

curprev 22:15, 13 June 2019‎ Britishfinance talk contribs‎ 27,874 bytes -559‎ rm; isn't this WP:GRAVEDANCING given he retired on the 11th? enough please. undo

Nothing is ever done about this casual drumbeat of Vested Contributors and Vested Administrators getting away with murder.

The only interest a model Administrator has here, the only thing the evidence supports, is a note to BF about edit warring. He did not do that. Nor did he intervene when Cassianto did it himself in his characteristic way.....

You mean well, bless your heart, but please read up before making such bold reversions. CassiantoTalk 22:23, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

This is the current state of English Wikipedia self-governance, this is what the WMF inevitably see when looking around to see if complaints against people like Fram, and complaints he is not being dealt with by the local constabulary, are being made.

Why did Floquenbeam even get involved by leaving a note for Cassianto? It is because he knows, as a long time Wikipedia Administrator of that cesspit, Cassianto is not an editor who would remotely approach that user with good faith, much less try to resolve their pissant trivial dispute calmly and civilly. As he showed at the same time as Floquenbeam stopped by.

What Cassianto is, at his rotten core, an absolute fucking douche, is just accepted as normal. Queen Bishonen goes so far as to send him on vacation voluntarily, so he can't talk himself into even more trouble on the astonishingly rare occasions it reaches the level of a formal inquiry.

This is a perfect example of the rot, even before you realize this Administrator then went on to use this discussion as as pretext to whine about how he hasn't got his way when it concerns Fram. Just general whining, between two old white dudes, funnily enough. Even pinged his intended target to the location, as if somehow he's expected to dignify it with a response. Harassment, in other words. Low level to be sure, but does douchbaggery really make it sound any less wrong than low level harassment? By an Administrator.

HIGHER STANDARD?

Get to fuck.

I would not trust the English Wikipedia community as far as I could throw it, if this guy is considered an exemplar Administrator. He was rightly demoted because his unilateral removal of an OFFICE site ban shows he is not possessing of good judgement or is in any way trustworthy enough to hold advanced permissions. The sort of person who does that, is the sort of person who does this.

Someone who when given power, is only destined to make things worse, because of pride, ego or self-assurance. A born asshole.

[CrowsNest]

TBH if everyone who had cast aspersions about (or even straight abused) other editors during this fiasco was blocked, we'd be about 20 editors down at the moment. Black Kite (talk) 08:52, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

And?

The state of the English Wikipedia community in a nutshell.

The urgent need to restore minimum standards is clear and obvious.

Needless to say, if lying to the community while an Administrator was also attracting blocks, they'd be down a Black Kite too. Protected species in their corner of the ecosystem though.

[CrowsNest]

The community are apparently having difficulty even figuring out if ArbCom can or should do anything as a result of the WMF banning Fram for a year, and events related. Not really comforting for those making the autonomy / self-government argument.

Here's one obvious task for ArbCom, and that falls entirely within their remit. Extracting an explanation from Bishonen for her unblock of Fram, one that doesn't fall apart at the first instance and reveal she is guilty of that ultimate crime for the separatists, tool abuse. Just file a motion, quick and painless.

It will require bravery, because even under the absurd revolutionary pre-conditions that WMF_OFFICE is just another Administrator bound by the same local procedures she is, her explanation is absurd, and she is guilty of tool abuse.

An invocation of IAR at this late stage, given her obvious awareness she was doing something highly controversial, would be equally absurd.

No other defences will be possible. Conviction would be inevitable, even if they decide to only give her a slap on the wrist, for fear of the consequences of doing anything that would look like an appropriate response in line with their previous tool abuse cases. I'm sure Rama would be a most interested observer.

The inability to stand up to Bishonen when she is in Queen Mode is just one of many ways en.wiki is not ready for or even capable of genuine self-government. Monarchy, perhaps. The status quo, in other words.