Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight

> Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 19:00:05 +0100 > From: nemow...@gmail.com > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > CC: deyntest...@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight > > ENWP Pine, 24/03/2013 18:39: > > If you're

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight

ENWP Pine, 24/03/2013 18:39: If you're interested in starting a broader discussion about the usefulness of arbcoms and alternatives to them, and the relationship of Jimbo to arbcoms, I think the best place to do that is at Meta. [...] I doubt it, the page would get deleted. Nemo _

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight

James, If you're interested in starting a broader discussion about the usefulness of arbcoms and alternatives to them, and the relationship of Jimbo to arbcoms, I think the best place to do that is at Meta. There have also discussions there about asking for some kind of outside intervention in t

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight

Le samedi 23 mars 2013 à 20:54 -0600, James Heilman a écrit : > So why did I not notify the arbcom list? I am sure all the arbcoms are > watching this one so I did not see it as necessary. > […] haha, who need to watch "The Young and the Restless" when you can subscribe to Wikimedia-l. Too bad tha

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight

Le samedi 23 mars 2013 à 18:45 -0600, James Heilman a écrit : > Have started a sort of RfC regarding Arbcom's recent denial to grant Will > Beback a return to editing > here. Hi, could you point me to some relevant pointer to understand what is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight

I agree. Please take this to the English Wikipedia mailing list. Kind regards, María Enviado desde mi dispositivo móvil El 24/03/2013, a las 07:54, Dariusz Jemielniak escribió: > On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 4:17 AM, James Heilman wrote: > >> This case partly pertains to how we see as the Wikime

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight

On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 4:17 AM, James Heilman wrote: > This case partly pertains to how we see as the Wikimedia Movement see > the interactions between Jimmy Wales, the Wikipedia community and > Arbcom. It would be interesting to get the perspectives of other > language versions of Wikipedia.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight

On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Peter Southwood wrote: > Is there a policy that requires that he do so? Mailing list wise, No. But it is considered good ettique to do so. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: h

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight

Is there a policy that requires that he do so? - Original Message - From: "Risker" To: "Wikimedia Mailing List" Sent: Sunday, March 24, 2013 3:19 AM Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight On 23 March 2013 20:45, James He

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight

This case partly pertains to how we see as the Wikimedia Movement see the interactions between Jimmy Wales, the Wikipedia community and Arbcom. It would be interesting to get the perspectives of other language versions of Wikipedia. James Heilman On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 8:54 PM, James Heilman wr

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight

On 23 March 2013 22:54, James Heilman wrote: > So why did I not notify the arbcom list? I am sure all the arbcoms are > watching this one so I did not see it as necessary. > James, I did not say you should have emailed the Arbitration Committee. There are multiple ways of notifying the Arbitrati

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight

So why did I not notify the arbcom list? I am sure all the arbcoms are watching this one so I did not see it as necessary. I am also not appealing arbcom's decision to arbcom. I am appealing arbcom's decision to the editing community at large. I guess I lack faith in the functioning of arbcom as a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight

On 23 March 2013 21:21, Tomasz W. Kozłowski wrote: > On 24 March 2013 02:19, Risker wrote: > > > James, can you please explain why you have decided this is a > Wikimedia-wide > > issue (and thus posted to this list), while not bothering to notify the > > Committee whose decision you are questioni

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight

On 24 March 2013 02:19, Risker wrote: > James, can you please explain why you have decided this is a Wikimedia-wide > issue (and thus posted to this list), while not bothering to notify the > Committee whose decision you are questioning that you are doing so? Since when does discussing the Arbitr

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight

On 23 March 2013 20:45, James Heilman wrote: > Have started a sort of RfC regarding Arbcom's recent denial to grant Will > Beback a return to editing > here. > I have a number of concerns regarding this decision. One being that it was > made w

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight

For years, the ArbCom has been the focal point for far more controversy than they have resolved. In recent times, that's become even more true - despite all the heat generated by their interventions on the project, they hear fewer cases and effectively arbitrate less even than that. Maybe it's time

[Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight

Have started a sort of RfC regarding Arbcom's recent denial to grant Will Beback a return to editing here. I have a number of concerns regarding this decision. One being that it was made without community input and in secrecy and two the evidenc