On 4 February 2014 11:45, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 4 February 2014 16:42, Harold Hidalgo <hah...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Perhaps it would be a good idea to understand how bad ArbCom managed the > > Rich Farmbrough case by putting him against a slow death that would > > ultimately end in a year-long ban handled by a single administrator. > > > Risker has not noted her personal involvement in such. She's not > defending the treatment of Rich Farmbrough as any sort of uninvolved > commentator. > > I'm not defending the treatment of any individual editor, David. I'm saying that it is wrong, just plain wrong, to try to leverage a situation involving any individual editor by name when making what is an otherwise valid point, particularly when unfamiliar with the entire background. Rich doesn't deserve to have his case reheard on this mailing list, when there's not a darn thing that's going to change as a result of it. He is a decent person and a dedicated Wikimedian, and people shouldn't be using his name to make political points.
I do try to stand up to that principle; there've been numerous opportunities for me over the years to point to the behaviour of specific individuals and try to make hay out of them. I may not always succeed, but I really do try, especially on this global mailing list. Risker _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>