As a housekeeping note, discussion has moved to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community_response_to_Wikimedia_Foundation%27s_ban_of_Fram
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 09:37 Robert Fernandez <wikigamal...@gmail.com> wrote: > Through various means I'm aware of the partial or full circumstances > of a number of office bans. In all cases, T&S investigated thoroughly > and acted appropriately. I don't know why this case would be any > different, or warrants pitchforks and torches from vocal members of > the community, but these are the same community members who break them > out at every opportunity in any case. > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 3:06 AM Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I am trying to have an open mind regarding this matter. > > > > I'm supportive of local and global bans in a variety of circumstances, > and > > if WMF thinks that sanctions are appropriate then I generally would > expect > > WMF to present the relevant evidence to community authorities. English > > Wikipedia has ways of dealing with editors who are accused of misconduct, > > and we have experienced administrators who are capable of investigating > > situations and implementing bans including cases which involve nonpublic > > evidence. > > > > In the absence of convincing evidence that demonstrates a major problem > > with a Wikimedia community's competence and willingness to adjudicate > cases > > in a fair manner, I think that WMF interventions such as this are > difficult > > to justify. Based on the limited information that I have, I disagree with > > WMF's process for this specific case, and in general I have ongoing > > concerns about WMF's process for WMF-initiated bans. WMF's lack of faith > in > > the English Wikipedia community authorities' competence to adjudicate a > > case such as this is discouraging and, as far as I know, not justified. > > Even if a local community has well known problems with its > self-governance, > > I think that the appropriate recourse would be to the global community. > > While the global community seems generally opposed to reviewing appeals > of > > specific local cases, I think that evidence of systemic problems would > > likely get more attention and perhaps even a request from the global > > community for WMF intervention. > > > > Based on the information that I know, I would reverse this WMF action and > > move the case to the English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee for its > > consideration. > > > > Pine > > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine ) > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: 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 and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
