None of my questions have been answered by the committee (or by David Gerard, who seems to think it's worth it to chime in without evidence) The critical questions are where I have been uncivil, "repeatably not respectingWikiquette", or "making personal attacks", according to Gideon (Gnangarra). That itself is looking like a personal attack when unaccompanied by links to these putative infractions of English Wikipedia policy. Linking to those policy pages appears irrelevant without showing specific examples of these infractions. Or is criticism of the committee's illegal actions and failures to abide by the Victorian Act now interpreted as personal attacks or abuses of "wikiquette"? Again, Putin's Russia? Still waiting for evidence of this. Still waiting for a reason I wasn't informed of the blocking. Still waiting for answers to my questions about governance and transparency. Tony
----- Original Message ----- From: "Wikimedia Australia Chapter" To:"Wikimedia Australia Chapter" Cc: Sent:Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:56:31 +0700 Subject:Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Apparently corrupt administration of this list On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 10:45 PM, David Gerard wrote: > FWIW, kicking people off the list in such circumstances has generally > been acceptable on Wikimedia lists, with or without notice. Though > notice is nice and adds to transparency. Really? You guys have banned regular Wikimedia contributions, who are not banned on any project and have made useful contributions to the chapter, from the mailing list without notice, and left them on the ban list for months without telling anyone? i.e. put their email address on the mailman 'ban_list'? I checked this lists ban list, and the other 49 entries are all addresses who have never, ever, posted to any wikimedia list that I have seen - i.e. they are spammers and the usual crazy emails, usually from the King of some recently declared micronation who isnt getting adequate coverage on Wikipedia. Did you look at Tony's emails in January? I have seen similar emails on the Wikimedia UK list, and the posters haven't been banned. > For list administration, I note that wikimediauk-l is explicitly a > list for "Wikimedians in and interested in the UK" and is not > specifically the chapter's list per se (and this distinction is > important to some people). So the wikimediauk-l admins are jdforrester > (WMF staff), dgerard (volunteer), richard.symonds (WMUK staff) and > thehelpfulonewiki (volunteer). James and I were adminstering it since > the days of WMUKv1, which we were both on the board of, but we're not > actually affiliated with the current WMUK. > > So I would suggest for the future (1) when kicking someone, say so and > why (unless there's a really good reason not to) (2) have a mix of > list admins. I agree with your suggestions there. The Wikimedia Australia list also predates the organisation by a long time. It has always had the purpose stated to be "Mailing list for discussing Wikimedia Australia" but has often been a "Wikimedians in and interested in Australia" list. Nathan Carter was the only list admin since the beginning IIRC. Nathan was instrumental in setting up the chapter, and was part of the inaugural committee, but that was only a short period. -- John Vandenberg _______________________________________________ Wikimediaau-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
_______________________________________________ Wikimediaau-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
