"Fram Gate" in Arbcom

[CrowsNest]

Proof, if it were needed, that the wholesale rejection of ArbCom, and of the entire premise that harassment has to be taken serious and Administrators have to be held to the very highest standards, isn't just a product of the unwashed masses. It comes from the absolutely most trusted and respected Administrators that the local en.wiki community has......

https://www.wikipediasucks.co/forum/vie ... 207#p11207

The Foundation has no choice. ArbCom is not doing anything to set these wannabe revolutionaries straight and remind them who is the ultimate authority regarding Administrator misconduct. They stopped responding to criticism of this sanction days ago, and understandably so because Wikipedia is a toxic environment where no explanation is good enough for the pitch fork brigade, led as they are by the local Administrators in defence of their own.

Sure, this guy isn't daring to actually undo these enforcement actions, he's too much of a coward and too in love with his status to ruin it with an official rebuke, but you can bet your life this is the sort of poorly thought out request to have it lifted that, if ignored, gets other less cowardly Administrators all primed to act on behalf of the mob. The block was short and has now expired so the temptation to break stuff in their name is now gone, but if it had been an indefinite block, as it arguably should have been, you can rest assured, hammers were going to be used to smash his chains and ensure his freedom, and damn the consequences.

If rogue Wikipedia Administrators think nothing of reversing office actions applied to their own popular bunk mates, it is a small step indeed to undoing the blocks of them by their supposed local powers. Contrary to the claims made post-Framban, there is absolutely no respect here on the part of trusted community rights holders for the fact this sanction was the result of a unanimous finding of their entire local Arbitration Committee, and there is even less appreciation for the idea this was done to stop a user being harassed by an Administrator, theoretically beholden to the highest, not the lowest, standards.

There is only a thought in the toxic community here for how this enforcement has affected the Administrator. Who, as of now, is still actually an Administrator and is only being prevented from editing by his own ego, which is telling him he is the real victim here. Other than the clear intent of the ArbCom sanction, nobody else in the Wikipedia community seems to want to tell him otherwise, either.

It is clear from events like this, the community is never going to accept the premise that Administrators are to be held to a higher standard. If they are popular enough, if they are deemed hard working enough, if they bleed for the Wiki enough, the standard applied will be lowered to wherever it needs to be lowered to ensure they face absolutely no consequences even for serious misconduct. Too valuable to be lost. Nothing must be done, lest they be scared away and lost forever, not even the piddling trifle of an interaction ban.

[CrowsNest]

Now we're told Ritchie's interactions with his victims had been raised privately with the Committee twice, and on the first occasion it was "dealt with" by a single Arbitrator. The second time, they got together to consider removal of his permissions via.......

Level II procedures may be used if (a) the account's behavior is inconsistent with the level of trust required for its associated advanced permissions, and (b) no satisfactory explanation is forthcoming

....but he came out of that with the more lenient interaction ban.

Those procedures do not require, much less mandate, an involved back and forth discussion with the Administrator being examined. He got his one and only phone call as required by policy, the Arbitrators evidently seeing enough to conclude further discussion was unnecessary.

Now we start to see the truth. For a start the procedural objections are complete bunk, it of course being absurd that if the Committee is allowed to remove an Administrator's permissions in this fashion, but if they deemed a lesser remedy was needed, they'd have to conduct a full public case.

We also see Ritchie has been happy to let the screaming community believe he was taken completely by surprise, and wouldn't have had any idea of why he was being asked that second time to account for those interactions. He hasn't told them what really happened, because it reflects badly on him, lessens the case that he is the real victim here. He's led them up the garden path, making it seem like he had only been given one chance, because that is what makes them mad and drives them to harass his enemies and seek revenge on the actual victim, on his behalf.

The parallels with Framban are obvious. The unwillingness of ArbCom to be fully transparent once they realise the mob is out for blood doesn't help (how was the first incident resolved, with an official warning or what?), but it is the absolute and total mistrust of the community in their elected representatives, and the willingness of bad actors like Ritchie to exploit it when they fall foul of the wikilaw, that is the real problem.

There is no working self government here. Not even close.

[CrowsNest]

Unsurprisingly, their record of failing to set themselves realistic deadlines is in tact......

Update to timelines
Hi All. Now that the evidence phase is complete, we are going to update the timelines on this case, as the initial ones were a bit optimistic. We have listened to feedback, and hope the following timescales make sense

* Private evidence phase until 7 August, now closed

* Anonymised & summarised evidence to be posted by 14 August and passed to Fram by email. This will also be posted publicly once Fram has had a chance to respond.

* Workshop open on 21 August - 28 August. We are currently discussing how this phase will look, but the current intent is to hold an open workshop based on the publicly visible evidence, however this may change.

* Proposed decision posted by 7 September

Any questions or suggestions about this process, please do feel free to respond here. WormTT(talk) 11:32, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

I have a question.

Since it was obvious at the time, and is only being confirmed now, that the result of this ArbCom ban review wasn't going to be known until at least one quarter of Fram's year long ban had run, why didn't people fight harder to have the guy unblocked in the interim? He was already under an interaction ban, and could have been subjected to any other temporary restrictions deemed appropriate.

Cruel, if you ask me. And I'm a right bastard, ask anyone.

[CrowsNest]

... I have stated at ArbCom that at some point I started too often crossing the line between being blunt and being a dick about it; but these issues were out in the open, dealt with by the community, and in general my approach was a lot better since then. It wil be interesting to see which issues will be raised, and from when. And if that will include any guidance for me (and for others) where they draw the line between checking the edits of problematic editors ...... and "harassment". Fram (talk) 07:22, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

This is Fram all over. Wants credit for in his eyes still not quite meeting the minimal standard, after he was put on notice by the community that he was not meeting the minimum standard.

And seriously, he really is stupid enough to believe other people will accept he doesn't know the difference between checking edits and harassment. The difference is whether you are being a dick or not. So unless he has been trying to not be a dick without knowing what being a dick looks like, we can be sure this is just yet more playing to the gallery, when what is required is even more introspection to get him to the place where he understands his idea of good progress is not likely to shared by those who have read WP:ADMIN.

[CrowsNest]

These idiots really can't do deadlines......

Still wrapping up the evidence, but almost finished; should be out in a day or two. Opabinia regalis (talk) 08:21, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

[Graaf Statler]

There is only one option left. WMF has to rent external, integer arbitrage who has to find out what is going on in that T&S department and who has to invest ALL the office bans in a professional way. Because neigther the community, nor Arbcom and the Wikimedia party goers have the the insight what is really going on here and the possibility to solve the T&S problems. That would be the only wise move.

Law cases are no option, because both WMF and we, the users have agreed no legal treats.(ToU)
This is the only way out of the T&S crisis. External arbitrage, and total freedom for them to solve the problems just as a court should do.The Dutch law offers this possibility, about other jurisdictions I don't no but likely they have something similar.

[Graaf Statler]

HA!

The first Eurocrap S.A. test partial SanFanBan of Trolling&Sucking....
Home, on the German WP, the home wiki of "Black Jan."

Eurocrap user Edith Wahr

A sock...........

First edit: 01:36, 4. Jul. 2006 Unterschied Versionen +65‎ Wikipedia:Umfragen/Wikipedia:Sockenpuppen ‎ →‎Enthaltungen

And if you lock trough the edits is it a typical sock of a person die niet ale een ander is..... Yes, exact. Autistic. And I realy see not any edit what should justify a partial SanFanBan, it's the usual shit of a guy die niet als een ander is.....

I said it many times to Bart Legal, autistic guy's shouldn't lie. Because it wouldn't surprise me at all if "Black Jan" had done the first test "SanFanBan new style" on one of his own socks.
And mabey it's a great idea there in Stockholm to find a hardware store, to buy a lot of quick drying cement, buckets are there plenty enough on Wikimania left of the Shit Bucket Challenge I saw on the program yesterday, and to put all die gasten with there feet in the concrete in front of the Stockholm’s opulent City Hall, which also hosts the annual Nobel and Banquet as a living statue with there slip on.

You guys wanted to fuck with Graaf Statler wasn't it? "Black Jan" in full action whit the SanFanBan weapon and at the end the appearance of Graaf Statler on the balcony there in Sweden.



GO HOME! Your Eurocrap game is over.

[CrowsNest]

The public summary has been passed to Fram by email for comment. As the delay was on our end, it is reasonable to allow him up to a week to comment before opening the workshop, however, if he responds sooner, we would be able to open the workshop sooner. As such, we will update the timelines once we have Fram's response. WormTT(talk) 8:51 am, Today (UTC+1)

Um, why does he get to comment before anyone else has even seen it?

What happens when he inevitably claims one of the incidents described was just a one off, completely out of character, and the public release prompts others to remember similar incidents. Are we seriously going to be asked to AGF he was simply mis-rememberging?

What happened to this idea that sunlight is what the whole Wikipedia justice system runs on? The whole point of this process we have waited so long to be completed, was to make it suitable for public consumption. So basically ArbCom are withholding evidence from the community for no other reason than they want to be in control of who thinks what and when.

[Graaf Statler]

Star chambers.

[Graaf Statler]

Here we can see everything.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php? ... 8#Evidence


Well, judge yourself. You guys know the English Wiki with all it's intriges much better than I do. The only thing what is complete clear is all the evidences has very little to nothing to do with madam Hale, what was made to the key "evidence" of Eurocrap S.A. in "Framgate".
And of course is Fram not that white knight and angle, it is simple a failed revolution.