Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Fram 2

[Guido den Broeder]

Just to be clear, I do believe Fram really should have apologized to Guido, at least once it became obvious that the insult was unwarranted (which it was). You're right in that the Arbcom pussyfooted around that whole situation - it was almost like they were doing the wrong thing for the right reason(s), or something. But he still should have apologized.

Honestly, of all the things I've seen in researching his background over the course of this whole fiasco, that's still the only thing that really struck me as being "over the top."

No Jake, he should have apologized to the 11-year old girl that he and his buddies hurt to get at me, just to prove that he had more power than ArbCom.

[JuiceBeetle]

For about 30 minutes between ca. 70%-60% I honestly felt bad for Fram. After starting with 28 support votes in 1 hour, he plunged, miserably.
Btw 28 support in the first hour... should we call this "inverse canvassing": when editors line up to be "invited"?

I hope he retires for good after this but even if not, being a regular editor after being an admin for so long is really going to suck!

Seeing how much he desires to get his bit back, it looks like it will suck for him. I don't pity him. If he was here to "build an encyclopedia", like the hundred thousand editors, then the admin tools would not be that necessary. He already has some extra groups: autopatrolled, rollbacker, new page reviewer and pending changes reviewer. If he was net positive editor, then it would not suck for him to lose the admin rights.

[Kumioko]

For about 30 minutes between ca. 70%-60% I honestly felt bad for Fram. After starting with 28 support votes in 1 hour, he plunged, miserably.
Btw 28 support in the first hour... should we call this "inverse canvassing": when editors line up to be "invited"?

I hope he retires for good after this but even if not, being a regular editor after being an admin for so long is really going to suck!

Seeing how much he desires to get his bit back, it looks like it will suck for him. I don't pity him. If he was here to "build an encyclopedia", like the hundred thousand editors, then the admin tools would not be that necessary. He already has some extra groups: autopatrolled, rollbacker, new page reviewer and pending changes reviewer. If he was net positive editor, then it would not suck for him to lose the admin rights.

Well if he doesn't pass, which he likely won't and doesn't retire, then he will almost certainly ask for more rights than that. Certainly Template editor and Page mover and probably anything else he can get. He's going to have to figure out what to do besides blocking people he doesn't like and he is going to have to deal with all the people he's pissed off, including a lot of admins.

He's going to have a target on his back for quite a while.

[Guido den Broeder]

He can always ask TonyBallioni to do the blocking for him, as he did while he was banned.

Everyone aware of the Fram RFA? Guy (help!) 23:38, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

You can count on Guy to help with the canvassing.

[JuiceBeetle]

You can count on Guy to help with the canvassing.

And to be generally distraught:

If I understand the way RfAs are designed, you get one question and then either a second question on another topic or a single followup question on the same topic. You don't get to keep asking additional followup questions, Morphing the Q&A format into a threaded discussion format. Is my understanding correct?

@Guy Macon: from the RFA header: There is a limit of two questions per editor, with relevant follow-ups permitted. So you can have 2 distinct questions, and relevant follow-ups to those distinct questions. — xaosflux Talk 18:05, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

He also examined ALL edits of Fram in the last year. I'll report back, when I finished counting...

... you indicated that roughly a year ago that you had re-evaluated your behavior and decided to make some changes and that you believe that the record shows that you did indeed change your behavior. I have personally examined every edit you have made since then, and I pretty much agree.

I find that hard to believe that he spent days reading all his edits.

[JuiceBeetle]

Fram's triggered discussion with Smallbones is a bit longer than usual, and some supporters questioned if its properly placed. For posterity:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Fram_2&oldid=918025911#Questions_for_the_candidate

Smallbones:
Can you guarantee that you will not harass or intimidate other editors, especially our elected representatives, and will start accepting the findings and remedies of ArbCom?

Fram:
A: Considering that you authored the BLP-deleted Signpost article about me, and then continued to make false claims about me at the arb case request about that Signpost page, I prefer not to interact with you. Fram (talk) 14:45, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Smallbones:
Follow-up: While you obviously don't like me, this is a community discussion - don't you think you owe it to the community to answer a question about you harassing and intimidating the elected representatives of the community?
As far as the article in The Signpost. Don't you remember emailing me after reading the full article (less than 24 hours before publication) "feel free to post it"? (ArbCom has a copy of the email, if you've lost yours). Don't you remember posting at about the same time "First, note that I have had plenty of chance to reply from the Signpost writer, so this longer reply is just to get some more space and to reply to the latest entries, not in any way a complaint about the report writer"? [5] Yet, after publication you started crying that I did not allow you to respond to the allegations. Is there any reason why I should trust your word ever again? Is there any reason other community members should trust you?

Fram:
I wrote a reply to the claims by Gamaliel and BU Rob13. You refused to add this to the article, claiming that my reply was too long; afterwards you claimed that I had not replied at all, and that I had outed Gamaliel. This can all be read at length at the rejected Arbcom Case and doesn't need rehashing here. Fram (talk) 16:24, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Smallbones:
Follow-up 2: No. I had to ask you 3 or 4 times to get a comprehendible response from you. I'm not required to get your approval to publish an article, only to make sure that you've had a chance to reply. When you wrote "feel free to post it" (in effect twice) that's enough for me, and it would be enough for any reporter. Then you wrote "I have prepared a reply at [6] which, after publication, should perhaps be copied over or linked to in the comments section under the page." I did not link that simply because it looked like a personal attack. And any potential admin should know that a blocked editor cannot edit on Wikipedia. Any editor who "copied over" a personal attack from a blocked user would be subject to being blocked as well. Do you understand those rules?

Burnt. The True Fram showed himself.

[Kumioko]

I see from the Fram discussion on WPO that Fram identified a previously undisclosed sock of Drmies and Drmies is Piisssst!

Now this is an opportunity for the community to decide, along with the Arbcom, if they want to allow the newly discovered sockmaster Drmies extra account to go unpunished since he is an admin or if they are going to hold him accountable.

My guess is, being that he's an admin, they'll brush it under the carpet.

[JuiceBeetle]

if they want to allow the newly discovered sockmaster Drmies extra account to go unpunished since he is an admin or if they are going to hold him accountable.
My guess is, being that he's an admin, they'll brush it under the carpet.

Who's the superintendent sock hunter, and who's friend he is? Bbb23 used his CU influence to save MaterialScientist, he will use it to save Drmies too.
Or it is time to reveal all the abuse he's done...
To start with, where is the evidence, that Drmies is really the sockmaster, and the other account is not an impersonation?

[Carrite]

I wanna put this one on the record...

93. Oppose To be clear, I believe that the one year WMF ban was both unjust and ham-fisted, and I am glad it was overturned by the very ArbCom that Fram despises. But the issue before us now is whether Fram's conduct has been acceptable for an administrator. In several cases, it is clear that he fell short, and in a few cases, he fell very far short. I came here hoping to see self-reflection and contrition. Instead, Fram chose this edit summary when beginning this RfA: "No discussion, no application of logic, no appeal to fairness or demand of actual evidence will change the position of those wanting to desysop. So let's get this started, shall we?" Instead of dissecting this strange and self-indulgent statement in detail, I will simply say that it represents Fram's usual attitude that any chaos and disruption he creates is the fault of other people who lack the ability to recognize and applaud his unique insights. I find the notion that we should only consider behavior in the last one year to be bizarre. Why not 18 months? Why not six months? Fram openly admits that he engaged in a two month spree of hostile, combative behavior less than two years ago, but he has not made a sincere humble apology to the community. I will not support Fram for administrator unless I see a dramatic change in his behavior, and so far, I haven't. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 6:36 pm, Today (UTC−7)

I feel like I need to shower, there's a lot of really shitty Cabalists in the Oppose section with me and almost all of the good content people are in the Support. I've been getting my ass lit up at WPO, but I'm right and they're wrong on this — Fram is an asshole that should not have tools.

Jim coming down on my side helps. Now if Dennis Brown and New York Brad would show up in the same place it would be truly validating.

RfB

P.S. Whoops, I see Brad is already on the wrong side of the barricade.

[Abd]

Share the wealth, guys. See something on WPO of interest, how about a link, I do I have to dig through a vast septic system to find it?