On 9 June 2018 at 18:14, Brion Vibber <bvib...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 10:00 AM Alex Monk <kren...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > This is outrageous. Not only are you blatantly misrepresenting what > various > > people are saying in the other thread and their intentions, > > > Perhaps. I've tried to go by the plain readings of position statements and > I could have made a mistake? >
For example where you said "IMHO specifically because some people are trying to avoid being bound by it or protesting its existence by looking for loopholes to avoid it", which is not at all what that thread is about as has been made very clear in that thread. On 9 June 2018 at 18:14, Brion Vibber <bvib...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > you are now > > suggesting that repository owners do not in fact get to decide what goes > in > > their repository and what does not, as if this has been the case all > along. > > > Yes I'm definitely explicitly saying that. Same applies to pages on > Wikipedia: you don't get to own them and veto others' clarifications. And > sometimes an admit makes an edit stick that you don't like. This is a bad analogy. Repository owners *are* essentially the admins, and in this case get content control. The people involving themselves are more akin to global users like stewards trying to override local admin actions, and in this case they're not really supposed to have such control of content. Like with on-wiki stuff, it's not really so bad when a global user comes and does uncontroversial cleanup, but global permissions are not for the purpose of involving oneself in local controversy. On 9 June 2018 at 18:14, Brion Vibber <bvib...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > > It is incredibly ironic how against the spirit of the CoC this all is. > > > Can you clarify? > Making Wikimedia technical spaces less welcoming to outsiders. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
