Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

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 o

Re: [Wikimedia-l] en.wp office yearlock block

Frankly, I'm surprised by how surprised everyone is. The Foundation has the responsibility to support the community, and the time, the expertise, the money and the people to do so. Individual volunteers, however well-meaning, do not. The Foundation has determined that in this particular case the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] en.wp office yearlock block

I think that you are making a number of assertions about the community, individuals, the Foundation, and the power and roles and responsibilities that aren't warranted. On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 2:15 AM Mister Thrapostibongles < thrapostibong...@gmail.com> wrote: > Frankly, I'm surprised by how s

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Lack of transparency from the WMF, whatelse is new. I'm currently under a funding ban secretly decided (by who?) based on a false accusation, without providing any evidence. Until now I'm waiting for an explanation from the WMF. So, this sort of attitude doesn't surprise me at all. It is very unfor

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

People who oppose the ban: Are you aware of all aspects and things Fram has done? Do you have the full picture? It's really saddening to see how fast people jump to conclusion in page mentioned in the email. I personally, don't know what happened so I neither can support or oppose the ban. As simpl

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

The point made by pretty much everyone is not that Fram should or should not be banned, but that the process in this case should have followed the standard dispute resolution avenues, More specifically, the case should have been communicated to the Arbitration Committee, whose members did sign the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Grupo de Usuários Wiki Movimento Brasil

Well, I just hope things turn out better this time. Fingers crossed! On Sat, 8 Jun 2019 at 09:31, Paulo Santos Perneta wrote: > Hey, > > The affiliate was originally formed in 2008 as the wannabe chapter > Wikimedia Brasil, and made its life as a chapter until 2010 when it was > noticed that it

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Amir, yes, ArbCom members must sign the WMF confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Confidentiality_agreement_for_nonpublic_information) , as must all functionaries (checkuser, oversight, etc.). I was on the English Wikipedia ArbCom for two years, and i

[Wikimedia-l] ¿Qué te hace feliz esta semana? / What's making you happy this week?

Hello colleagues, I hope that you feel welcome to add your own comments to this email thread. Your participation would be appreciated, including starting these threads in future weeks. I like this Commons Pictur

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Form 990 for FY 2017-2018 now on-wiki

Hello everyone, The Wikimedia Foundation has submitted our annual Form 990 to the US Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and posted on-wiki[1]. The Form 990 is the annual financial reporting, known as an “information return,” which the federal go

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Wow, what a cluster. How does the WMF get themselves into these things? I have ten edits to en.wp since 2018 and even I could have 100% predicted the entire spectrum, and scale, of the reaction here. Why are WMF staffers so deeply, fundamentally disconnected from the communities where they feel the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Nathan writes: *“Why are WMF staffers so* *deeply, fundamentally disconnected from the communities where they feel the* *right to ban people for saying "fuck arbcom"?”* I’ve seen no evidence that this is the case here and would be utterly shocked if a t&s staff member had indeed banned for sayi

Re: [Wikimedia-l] ¿Qué te hace feliz esta semana? / What's making you happy this week?

What’s making me happy is also sad (how can one separate hapiness from sadness as you obviously need one to measure the other). My mom is in hospital, her breath cancer spreaded again with metastasis. Yep, looks bad. But I discovered a thread which was shared on twitter by francophone wikipedi

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Phillipe, Can you imagine a hypothetical situation where it would have been appropriate for this WMF office action to exist though - that is to say, not serious enough to ban a user from any other wiki than en. and serious enough to take direct action outside of the community? I sure can't, yet h

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Martian, While it’s not something I could conjure up today, my time at WMF exposed me to enough things that I could not have imagined prior to seeing them for myself that I am unwilling to discount that such a situation could exist. Philippe On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 11:25 PM Martijn Hoekstra wro

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Philippe, the email from Trust & Safety said quite clearly that the ban was triggered by edit 895438118. I assume that T&S would not lie about their reasons for something like this. ‫בתאריך יום ג׳, 11 ביוני 2019 ב-22:35 מאת ‪Philippe Beaudette‬‏ <‪ phili...@beaudette.me‬‏>:‬ > Nathan writes: > >