Bans without explanations are certainly not acceptible.

rubin

2015-01-20 14:18 GMT+03:00 Ricordisamoa <ricordisa...@openmailbox.org>:

> It is now clear that the superprotect affair was only a preliminary move.
> Now they hide themselves behind a collective account <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:WMFOffice> issuing batches of global
> locks <https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&;
> type=globalauth&user=WMFOffice&year=2015&month=1> and writing boilerplate
> replies <https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:
> WMFOffice&diff=10982297>.
> As with the superprotect, the how is to blame, not the what. Note that I
> do not object global locks at all.
> What I object is the lack of a published reason for them, and the
> community interaction that Lila called so deeply for.
> They can play with the Terms Of Use, protecting any page on any project
> and global-locking any account "to protect the integrity and safety of the
> site and users", actually at their sole discretion.
> The breach of trust is complete now. The only thing that may stop me from
> leaving the projects for good is my loyalty to the volunteer community.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to