"Fram Gate" in Arbcom

[CrowsNest]

Silk Tork wanted to file an Arb Case on Fram. He chose not to. FRAMGATE was the result.

It appears he has not learned his lesson.......

Personally I would have preferred a public case (there is evidence of Richie having been outspoken with several users), but that was seen as inappropriate from various angles, including procedure and public exposure

Now, if the Foundation are no longer hearing complaints for 'normal' cases of sub-par Administrators being given countless free passes by the community, it begs the question, how many years will pass before Ritchie is finally subjected to a full public Case about his Administrative conduct, and asked the serious questions?

The precious fuck retired after being handed a mere iban, so you can imagine he'd probably do himself in if he was subjected to a full case. If he isn't already swinging from a rafter as we speak. For a guy who supposedly never really attached much importance to being an Administrator, being one of the worst 'content is all there is' types, it's really bizarre how seriously he is affected by challenges to his fitness to serve.

Definitely something coming unglued in his head. The Wikipedians are to blame. This is what happens if you let people like Ritchie believe for years, that they are actually good Administrators. One way or another, reality catches up with them. It can take years, but it happens, eventually. The End.

[CrowsNest]

They seriously don't see the contradiction.

It is a two-way. Enforceable by blocking. The wording that was agreed was intended to underline that of the two parties, though both wanted an iban, Richie had no choice in the matter as it was felt that he had behaved inappropriately. The more this conversation goes on the less helpful it is to either party. ArbCom acted within agreed scope. If the community wish to change that scope then a general discussion can be started (without referencing any individuals). If people are concerned about Richie, then perhaps reach out to him in private. I think that would be more helpful to him right now than continuing to dig publicly into why he was ibanned. I hope that makes sense. SilkTork (talk) 18:57, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

It's not a one-way. They are both banned from interacting with one another under the standard IBAN terms. Praxidicae's IBAN persists as long as Ritchie's does; she cannot change her mind and choose not to be IBANned. The enforcement is equal - should either side violate it, it is enforceable with blocks via normal channels. Rewriting would imply that we found Praxidicae equally at fault for the situation, and the consensus we came to after looking into the situation and the history was that that was not the case. I am strongly opposed to any wording which implies that someone who came to us as the victim of harassment is equally at fault: hence the asymmetry. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:01, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

A two way ban, indivisible, and with the exact same enforcement provisions on both parties, is the literal definition of symmetry.

The message to victims is clear.

Whoever advised Praxidicae to accept these terms, needs to hand in their license to practice wikilaw. She has been screwed, and now Ritchie is being painted as the victim and is the one garnering all the sympathy.

[CrowsNest]

I'm loving how, in the space of a week, the community has gone from seeing ArbCom as its saviour from tyranny, to a bunch of incompetent fucks whose communication issues and habit of colouring outside the lines means they too have to be OVERTHROWN.

Unfortunately for the community, Floquenbeam doesn't want to do it, and there are no other heros.

When are they going to realise, this ArbCom is no worse than the previous ones? The Foundation aren't as incompetent as they think, they acted because ArbCom has never been the font of wisdom and good judgement the the community portrayed them as during FRAMGATE.

Some are waffling about how something could theoretically be done without any Floquenbeam style "civili disobedience", but they've run up against the usual roadblock. BECAUSE THEY DON'T OWN THE SITE and because THEY ARE NOT AN AUTONOMOUS SELF-GOVERNING COMMUNITY they have realised, if ArbCom won't go voluntarily, until the next "election", they are shit out of luck. As for having an early election, going cap in hand to the Foundation is their only option. Nothing in it for Jimmy to be their hero this time around, he is hardly going to be the one to overthrow the elected government he literally just fought the Foundation to insist are the proper legal authorities.

Amma to just gonna say this........

AAAAHHHH HAA HA HAA HA HA GUFFAAWWW WOOT

Karma is a bitch.

[CrowsNest]

The corrupt Bureacrat speaks....

Just noting that I'm pretty disgusted by a whole bunch of elements of this mess. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 09:35, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

I bet you are. Just not the contributions of The Rambling Man, eh? His co-nominator for Administrator, and nominated for Bureaucrat.

Such a paragon of moral virtue. Such a visionary leader.

Anyone who is mystified by how or why Wikipedia became such a toxic shithole, you can't go wrong examining the first wave of post-Jimmy community appointees, people appointed by scum for their inherent scumminess.

This is the long term rot that FRAMBAN was meant to fumigate.

[Graaf Statler]

Ed Wood could at least make several films known for being funnily bad: Laura Hale doesn't have any of the passion he had. Laura Hale is motivated by money and getting more of it, like the FanHistory Wiki she did or the ParaSport News/Data thing.

Is that so Katie? Because I see something else. I see her as a young woman who was still searching for her way in live, did absolute her best and paid a lot of money out of here own pocket.
And I see not any indication she should be a fraud, or that she was involved in "Framgate" other than that she had complained about the behaving of "Fram" Or his direct boss, because it is a sock of an Dutch user, not a Belgium gut what he is claiming. .

Can you give us at least some links, evidences of what you are claiming here?

[Graaf Statler]

https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... 50#p244346

Can we please have decent COI rules? Can we have a commitment that all rules will be applied equally without regard to race, gender, age, nationality or relationship to WMF Board members?

We all support more female editors, but that does not mean that we have to tolerate mistreatment of male editors at the hands of a toxic female editor.

You got it, Eagle! And put this in a wider perspective with for instance chapter members, sysops and Arb's. Because the problem is much wider than only toxic female editors. Because toxic and corrupt WMF employers, sysops, Arb's and chapter members are as bad as toxic female editors. And you guys on WO are as toxic as hell too to make this difference by focussing only on female editors.

About the rest I don't judge, I was not there, but Fram is as toxic as hell!
Because I have seen him operating myself in the Guido roadshow in cooperation with Eurocrap S.A. in full action. And you guys can twist and twist the true, but Fram's arbcom case is about the behaviour of Fram, and about nothing else! Because till now there is not any direct connection between Hall and the T&S action proven, and the only thing we see is the blinding gaslight of WO!

Gaslighting is a tactic in which a person or entity, in order to gain more power, makes a victim question their reality. It works much better than you may think. Anyone is susceptible to gaslighting, and it is a common technique of abusers, dictators, narcissists, and cult leaders. It is done slowly, so the victim doesn't realize how much they've been brainwashed

[Graaf Statler]

My advice to arbcom, order a CU of Fram by WMF to get this matter clear.

[CrowsNest]

Absolutely, but let's face it, the sequence
-"Hi, there's a complaint about you, would you like to respond to it?"
-"Yes, here's my response".
-"Thanks for that, we've thought about it in private, you're the aggressor, here's a ban"
is exactly what ArbCom said wasn't acceptable from T&S... Black Kite (talk) 20:02, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Um, what's that sparky? When did they supposedly say that?

Of course, they couldn't have said this at all, or anything like it, because Fram being denied the opportunity to even respond to a forthcoming ban was a big part of the controversy.

What they said was, ArbCom needs to have jurisdiction over handling matters that only pertain to en.wiki, is which is as we now understand, everything except child molesters and violent offenders. They never said these matters couldn't be dealt with in private or that their proceedings, while allowing for the accused to respond, wouldn't be seemingly opaque and harsh in their outcome, if needs be.

Everything is in their discretion, as per the local policy, and local Administrators acting so poorly they need to be forcibly separated from users, is, theoretically at least, a serious issue that requires a serious response. Arguably it merits a complete demotion. Which is why corrupt Administrators like you have for years been trying to undermine their authority and reserve such matters to your own kind, the old guard Administrators with their old school ways.

[CrowsNest]

I am by no means suggesting taking away ArbCom's role in private cases. I am suggesting that ArbCom handle cases privately only when there is something private about them to start with. If the entire case revolves around on-wiki spats between editors, there is no reason to handle it privately, because there is nothing private about it to begin with. ...... Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:17, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Just as he did when he led the revolt in FRAMGATE, this piece of shit is getting away with blatantly misrepresenting the situation at hand. The committee could not have been clearer, and Ritchie himself has confirmed it, the decision to keep this private was because the evidence involved deeply personal statements, things that (they assumed at least), the parties would not want to be divulged on the open wiki, potentially affecting the effectiveness of the inquiry into who did what and why.

Is this guy going to get warned or blocked for so blatantly talking out of his ass, pursuant a transparently obvious sociopolitical gain? Based on Framgate, we can confidently say no.

And yes, this guy is an Administrator, which is the WHOLE FUCKING PROBLEM with the toxic Wikipedia environment.

Every Administrator who thinks it's acceptable to purposefully and deliberately misrepresent others for their own ends, which is an actual slam dunk violation of WP:CIVIL (proving that these scumbags have never even read that policy) needs to be removed. And forcibly, because they 'aint going quietly, that's for damn sure.

[CrowsNest]

The complete illegitimacy of ArbCom, writ large......

Ritchie, I very much hope that you will look back here and see what I am going to say. We really need you back. In one fish's opinion, a clear consensus has emerged that ArbCom treated you badly, and that you really are a kind of victim rather than some sort of nasty bully. It's certainly what I believe. You are a valued member of the community, and I personally value you as a wiki-friend. Wikipedia as a whole does not disrespect you. It's just a few people who got it wrong. Wikipedia as a whole will welcome you back – and who gives a flying fuck about the haters? Please, when you feel ready, come back. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:48, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

.......

I really mean what I said above: there is very little sentiment around here that you are in the wrong. The most insane of the insane are a minority. Please take as much time as you feel like, but when you are ready, please come back. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:47, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

For daring to apply an interaction ban to a beloved Administrator, the precious ArbCom are not just wrong, they're back to being publicly denigrated as "insane" and just a bunch of "haters" who have completely misunderstood who are the real victims and who are the real harassers.

Seriously, this is happening, and this guy won't get blocked for these comments, even though they go FAR BEYOND Fram's infamous last stand, a similar anti-ArbCom rant, that was apparently the straw that broke the camel's back.

The Foundation has no choice. Anyone who comes to them arguing ArbCom has the trust and respect of the Wikipedia community, that they are their rightful and legitimate instrument of self-government, an body who can be trusted to apply minimal standards to local Administrators, they're lying.

They are a puppet regime, they have no legitimacy, and no power. The power is vested in the mob, the gang of angry individuals like this douche, who despite not possessing any community recognized status of his own, except the rather easy to obtain not currently blocked, and despite not having raised any RfC to establish whether his broad claims of support really are all that broad, is acting like he speaks for the community.

That he gets away with so boldly and blatantly issuing personal attacks and general bad faith to ArbCom, is proof that on some level, he does at least speak for the community. Because they're collectively just that kind of scum. If they're not doing it directly, then they at the very least condone it with their silence.

There is but one cure. The purification of fire.

Burn it all.