Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight
Is there a policy that requires that he do so? - Original Message - From: Risker risker...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Sunday, March 24, 2013 3:19 AM Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight On 23 March 2013 20:45, James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com wrote: Have started a sort of RfC regarding Arbcom's recent denial to grant Will Beback a return to editing herehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jmh649/Will_Beback. I have a number of concerns regarding this decision. One being that it was made without community input and in secrecy and two the evidence to support the original indefinite ban is so weak. Much of the evidence provided pertains to Will's position regarding COI and his interactions directly with Jimmy Wales. In light of current issues with arbcom and seperately with COI now might be a good time to consider the need for community oversight of abrcoms activities. Note that I was involved and did see the private evidence in question. It however is interesting to look at the public evidence as quoted by arbcom. James, can you please explain why you have decided this is a Wikimedia-wide issue (and thus posted to this list), while not bothering to notify the Committee whose decision you are questioning that you are doing so? Risker ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.2240 / Virus Database: 2641/5698 - Release Date: 03/23/13 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net wrote: Is there a policy that requires that he do so? Mailing list wise, No. But it is considered good ettique to do so. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 4:17 AM, James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com wrote: This case partly pertains to how we see as the Wikimedia Movement see the interactions between Jimmy Wales, the Wikipedia community and Arbcom. It would be interesting to get the perspectives of other language versions of Wikipedia. I'm not certain if there is any common pattern of interactions between the Arbcoms, the Wikipedia communities, and Jimmy Wales. in any case, I think that local issues (one local ArbCom decision) should not necessarily be discussed at international level, unless there is a clear concrete explanation what can be drawn from them - way too often the English Wikipedia and its ArbCom are presented and interpreted as THE Wikipedia and THE ArbCom. best, dariusz ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight
I agree. Please take this to the English Wikipedia mailing list. Kind regards, María Enviado desde mi dispositivo móvil El 24/03/2013, a las 07:54, Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl escribió: On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 4:17 AM, James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com wrote: This case partly pertains to how we see as the Wikimedia Movement see the interactions between Jimmy Wales, the Wikipedia community and Arbcom. It would be interesting to get the perspectives of other language versions of Wikipedia. I'm not certain if there is any common pattern of interactions between the Arbcoms, the Wikipedia communities, and Jimmy Wales. in any case, I think that local issues (one local ArbCom decision) should not necessarily be discussed at international level, unless there is a clear concrete explanation what can be drawn from them - way too often the English Wikipedia and its ArbCom are presented and interpreted as THE Wikipedia and THE ArbCom. best, dariusz ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight
Le samedi 23 mars 2013 à 18:45 -0600, James Heilman a écrit : Have started a sort of RfC regarding Arbcom's recent denial to grant Will Beback a return to editing herehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jmh649/Will_Beback. Hi, could you point me to some relevant pointer to understand what is arbcom and COI? kind regards, mathieu ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight
Le samedi 23 mars 2013 à 20:54 -0600, James Heilman a écrit : So why did I not notify the arbcom list? I am sure all the arbcoms are watching this one so I did not see it as necessary. […] haha, who need to watch The Young and the Restless when you can subscribe to Wikimedia-l. Too bad that I missed a few thousand episodes. :P ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight
James, If you're interested in starting a broader discussion about the usefulness of arbcoms and alternatives to them, and the relationship of Jimbo to arbcoms, I think the best place to do that is at Meta. There have also discussions there about asking for some kind of outside intervention in the Russian Wikipedia due to infighting there, so your request for this kind of discussion already has a parallel on Meta. But the consensus seems to be that outsiders shouldn't overrule the decision of a project's arbcom. I think it would take a significant Meta RFC to come up with a mechanism that changes this situation, and right now I think that's highly unlikely. If you are dissatisfied with a decision made by ENWP Arbcom and you think that the constitutional arrangements for ENWP Arbcom should be changed, I think you are best served by having that discussion on ENWP and/or on the ENWP email list. This is a long way of saying that I agree with Maria and Risker. I feel that the tone of Risker's first email should have been more respectful, but I also understand that Risker and Arbcom probably get an endless series of complaints and keeping one's composure in that situation can be difficult. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight
ENWP Pine, 24/03/2013 18:39: If you're interested in starting a broader discussion about the usefulness of arbcoms and alternatives to them, and the relationship of Jimbo to arbcoms, I think the best place to do that is at Meta. [...] I doubt it, the page would get deleted. Nemo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 19:00:05 +0100 From: nemow...@gmail.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org CC: deyntest...@hotmail.com Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight ENWP Pine, 24/03/2013 18:39: If you're interested in starting a broader discussion about the usefulness of arbcoms and alternatives to them, and the relationship of Jimbo to arbcoms, I think the best place to do that is at Meta. [...] I doubt it, the page would get deleted. Nemo An RFC about the topics that I mentioned would be within scope for Meta, although I'm not predicting a successful RFC. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight
For years, the ArbCom has been the focal point for far more controversy than they have resolved. In recent times, that's become even more true - despite all the heat generated by their interventions on the project, they hear fewer cases and effectively arbitrate less even than that. Maybe it's time to evaluate whether they continue to serve an important function in the community. Is there a better model for resolving disputes? Something that doesn't attempt and fail to emulate court proceedings, giving people the hope for fairness and objectivity without its reality? Now seems like a particularly good time to begin that evaluation. Several highly trafficked attempts at reform have tried and failed to restore confidence in the committee; two well known arbitrators, one a WMF contractor, have resigned in the last weeks. So let's turf it and start over. In the mean time, ad-hoc groups of administrators will continue to perform the bulk of the work as they have been for a long time. When even the committee can't claim they are contributing solutions, it's clear not much will be lost if their role is discontinued while a replacement is sought. ~Nathan ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight
On 23 March 2013 20:45, James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com wrote: Have started a sort of RfC regarding Arbcom's recent denial to grant Will Beback a return to editing herehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jmh649/Will_Beback. I have a number of concerns regarding this decision. One being that it was made without community input and in secrecy and two the evidence to support the original indefinite ban is so weak. Much of the evidence provided pertains to Will's position regarding COI and his interactions directly with Jimmy Wales. In light of current issues with arbcom and seperately with COI now might be a good time to consider the need for community oversight of abrcoms activities. Note that I was involved and did see the private evidence in question. It however is interesting to look at the public evidence as quoted by arbcom. James, can you please explain why you have decided this is a Wikimedia-wide issue (and thus posted to this list), while not bothering to notify the Committee whose decision you are questioning that you are doing so? Risker ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight
On 23 March 2013 21:21, Tomasz W. Kozłowski odder.w...@gmail.com wrote: On 24 March 2013 02:19, Risker wrote: James, can you please explain why you have decided this is a Wikimedia-wide issue (and thus posted to this list), while not bothering to notify the Committee whose decision you are questioning that you are doing so? Since when does discussing the Arbitration Committee at a mailing list require their permission? I think I might have missed something… It does not require permission. However, the English Wikipedia community has a longstanding process for appealing decisions of the Arbitration Committee. It would also be common courtesy to do so. As it is, James has made a very good show of trying to insinuate that Will Beback was banned in relation to conflict of interest. He was not banned for that reason; he was banned for persistent violations of the No Personal Attacks policy, the outing and harassment policies and for exhibiting battleground behaviour. [1] I cannot speak to what comparable policies exist on other projects. Risker [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/TimidGuy_ban_appeal#Findings_of_fact ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight
So why did I not notify the arbcom list? I am sure all the arbcoms are watching this one so I did not see it as necessary. I am also not appealing arbcom's decision to arbcom. I am appealing arbcom's decision to the editing community at large. I guess I lack faith in the functioning of arbcom as a whole especially in light of the recent resignation of a couple of arbcom members and the persons attacks against me from members of that group. I do not agree with the secrecy that surround the majority of the deliberations of this committee. I believe that conversation should be open / public as much as possible. Thus I have elected for an open conversation. To add to this the arb who drafted the case in question has agreed that Will Beback never outed anyone on Wikipedia. The evidence for outing was a private email sent to the arbitration committee itself among a few others. So yes I will keep my conversations public. I do not wish private email to the arbitration committee to be used for my own banning. Per Will I have honored the ban for more than one year, during which time I have neither engaged in any ban evasion nor in off-wiki campaigning. I have apologized to TimidGuy, expressed my remorse for my errors, and promised to avoid repeating them. In my appeal, I did challenge some of the findings in the case, which I believe were based on insufficient evidence or misinterpretation of policy. Apparently banned users are not allowed to argue for their innocence and can only admit to total guilt and beg for mercy. The appeal was rejected without explanation, and without even telling me who voted for or against it. I am not sure how the ArbCom processes these appeals, which is done entirely in secret. I have been a constructive editor in the past, and believe that I can be again. With respect to very good show of trying to insinuate that Will Beback was banned in relation to conflict of interest I am just quoting the evidence arbcom has provided. The rest of the evidence is equally poor IMO but others are free to look and judge for themselves. -- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine www.opentextbookofmedicine.com ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
