2017-02-16 5:57 GMT+01:00 Pine W :
> Hi Fae,
>
> A few points:
>
> * Thank you for trying to get and maintain a public list of WMF accounts
> with special permissions. I think that this is helpful for the community to
> know. I also think that WMF should actively maintain the list of WMF
> account
I don't see the point of paying for legal and community safety experts
if we aren't going to allow them to engage in their area of
professional expertise. Transparency, due process, and community
governance are important values, but they are not the skills you need
to bring to bear when it comes t
Still, in some cases the WMF global ban sounds like a revenge to an
individual, and when (understandably) WMF refuses to elaborate what was the
motivation for a global ban this impression gets even stronger.
Cheers
Yaroslav
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Robert Fernandez
wrote:
> I don't see
Were I a "predatory individuals victimizing underage editors" there would
be a reason to threaten me with a ban for replying to questions from other
editors on my home talk page. But I am not. James' bad faith is
unacceptable.
Fae
On 16 Feb 2017 14:22, "Robert Fernandez" wrote:
I don't see the
Hi Fae,
I don't think the argument was that you were a "predatory individual
victimizing underage editors", but that the rules and practices should
recognize that such people exist and our projects need protection from
them. This is at least my reading of this.
best,
dariusz
On Thu, Feb 16, 2
Pine
> * Thank you for trying to get and maintain a public list of WMF accounts
> with special permissions. I think that this is helpful for the community to
> know. I also think that WMF should actively maintain the list of WMF
> accounts with special permissions, and the reasons for granting th
After what Asaf and I agree was a sufficient time for a call for
candidates, we've appointed two new list administrators.
Please welcome Shani Evenstein and John Mark Vandenberg as your new list
overlords.
Austin
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guideli
If WMF staff members are blocking volunteers out of revenge, we have much
larger problems than transparency.
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 9:57 AM, Yaroslav Blanter wrote:
> Still, in some cases the WMF global ban sounds like a revenge to an
> individual, and when (understandably) WMF refuses to elabo
On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 18:26:04 +
Austin Hair wrote:
>
> After what Asaf and I agree was a sufficient time for a call for
> candidates, we've appointed two new list administrators.
>
> Please welcome Shani Evenstein and John Mark Vandenberg as your new list
> overlords.
>
Welcome aboard! A
On 2017-02-16 14:01, Robert Fernandez wrote:
If WMF staff members are blocking volunteers out of revenge{{cn}}
We would indeed [have bigger problems]. Thankfully, there is
absolutely no indication that this ever happened beyond vague musings
and specious allegations made on the basis of "I d
I agree completely with both Robert and Marc.
James, it is my understanding that every global ban must be signed off by
the Legal department. Is this correct? If so, not only would this provide
a check against the hypothetical situation of someone being globally banned
in a fit of pique, but it
Hi all!
A lot going on this week, which means we’re making progress. Let’s jump
right in:
*Feedback requested*
There are two items in particular on Meta-Wiki ready for your feedback:
- Updated processes and timelines for Tracks A & B
https://meta.wikimedia.org/?curid=10152629
- Documen
Welcome, and thank you!
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 18:26:04 +
> Austin Hair wrote:
>
> >
> > After what Asaf and I agree was a sufficient time for a call for
> > candidates, we've appointed two new list administrators.
> >
> > Please welcome
Hello everyone,
The next Wikimedia Foundation metrics and activities meeting will take
place on Thursday, February 23, 2017 at 7:00 PM UTC (11 AM PST). The IRC
channel is #wikimedia-office on irc.freenode.net, and the meeting will be
broadcast as a live YouTube stream.
The theme of the February m
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 11:58 PM, John Mark Vandenberg
wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> I agree these types of breakages, if unintentional and not regular,
> should be raised elsewhere first.
>
> Given Fae's reluctance to use private correspondence,...
>
> Is there a public wiki page which can be used to a
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Craig Franklin
wrote:
> I agree completely with both Robert and Marc.
>
> James, it is my understanding that every global ban must be signed off by
> the Legal department. Is this correct? If so, not only would this provide
> a check against the hypothetical sit
>
> This is correct, all global bans (after a complaint has been made) go
> through:
>
>
>- Investigation by Support & Safety team member -->
>- Review and Recommendation by the Manager of Trust & Safety (myself)
>-->
>- Approval by the Director of Support & Safety and the Chief of
Thanks James.
Was the procedure always like this? We know that there was one person
banned by WMF in 2012, two in 2014, 8 in 2015, and 6 in 2016. Did they all
go through this procedure?
Cheers
Yaroslav
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 2:15 AM, James Alexander
wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 3:40 PM, C
18 matches
Mail list logo
