Bonus points if you spotted Carcharoth jumping ship when he saw it sinking

****************

From User.CoolHandLuke at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 00:48:45 2009
From: User.CoolHandLuke at gmail.com (Cool Hand Luke)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 18:48:45 -0600
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
Message-ID: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>

I hate to bring this up because it's circling Wikipedia Review, but I find
it even more troubling that Gerard's "joke" posts about Scientology, etc.
See:
http://davidgerard.co.uk/notes/2009/11/27/...-waste-of-skin/

Somebody posted a twitter message about about vandalism then on the page of
right-wing Australian bloger Andrew
Landeryou<http://twitter.com/jeamland/status/6096776618>.
In response, David Gerard
tweeted<http://twitter.com/davidgerard/status/6096819270>,
"mr landeryou has some history on wikipedia. (i did the sockpuppet
investigation.)" I think this troubling enough itself; it's unseemly for a
current checkuser to brag about catching somebody on Wikipedia, presumably
engaged in self-promotion. Andrew Landeryou sent Gerard an angry email
stating that Gerard should have talked to him before making the claim, then
adding a threat that Mr. Landeryou would investigate Gerard if he did it
again and it would be a "very unpleasant outcome for you, so I urge you to
Twit more carefully in future."

Gerard posts the whole thing, with headers, along with his original tweet.

Why does David Gerard still have checkuser? He used it a few weeks ago for
Amorrow, but prior to that had not used in eight months (and hardly any
checks for the last 17 months). I find Gerard's comments embarrassing to
Wikipedia and perhaps even chilling. Why would any notable person want to
edit Wikipedia when they know a loose cannon CU will publicly brag about
catching him or her later?

I move we remove his CU bit immediately. The rest (oversight, functionary
access), I don't feel so passionate about, but we have to send a signal to
the CU corp and the community that this crap is unacceptable.

Frank

----------
From marc at uberbox.org Sun Nov 29 00:57:14 2009
From: marc at uberbox.org (Marc A. Pelletier)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:57:14 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4B11C6EA.9060204@uberbox.org>

(cc'ed to Jimmy)

Cool Hand Luke wrote:
> I hate to bring this up because it's circling Wikipedia Review, but I
> find it even more troubling that Gerard's "joke" posts about
> Scientology, etc. See:
> http://davidgerard.co.uk/notes/2009/11/27/...-waste-of-skin/

Again?!

We need to show him the door. I'm sorry, but he's a liability for the
project(s) and his apparent status gives him the credibility to cause
real harm. It's a shame he's on so many rolodexes, but he still
blusters around as though he is speaking from the project when we are
consistently ashamed of his behavior.

He's had numerous chances before; we all tried several time to ask him
to tone his rhetoric down and he is unwilling or unable to. We need to
make it very clear that his behavior is unwelcome and unbecoming, and
that any pretension of speaking for the project is entirely illusory.

That he discusses his checkuser work is just the proverbial straw.

-- Coren / Marc
----------
From newyorkbrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 01:04:05 2009
From: newyorkbrad at gmail.com (Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia))
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:04:05 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <4B11C6EA.9060204@uberbox.org>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11C6EA.9060204@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <c52819d30911281704n6215ab76s3f6227c22a658768@mail.gmail.com>

I'm also remarkably unimpressed by his posting the e-mail with the routing
information.

However, we probably do need to let him know we're considering action before
we finalize anything.

Newyorkbrad

On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Marc A. Pelletier <marc at uberbox.org> wrote:

> (cc'ed to Jimmy)
>
> Cool Hand Luke wrote:
> > I hate to bring this up because it's circling Wikipedia Review, but I
----------
From rlevse at cox.net Sun Nov 29 01:04:56 2009
From: rlevse at cox.net (rlevse at cox.net)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:04:56 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <4B11C6EA.9060204@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <20091128200456.OOE5F.332690.imail@eastrmwml41>

Totally agree. See my posts from 6 months ago.

R
----------
From wizardmanwiki at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 01:05:32 2009
From: wizardmanwiki at gmail.com (Wizardman)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:05:32 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <20091128200456.OOE5F.332690.imail@eastrmwml41>
References: <4B11C6EA.9060204@uberbox.org>
<20091128200456.OOE5F.332690.imail@eastrmwml41>
Message-ID: <ef59f700911281705p4b170d14p60de903693645a4a@mail.gmail.com>

I third it.
~W

On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 8:04 PM, <rlevse at cox.net> wrote:

> Totally agree. See my posts from 6 months ago.
>
> R
----------
From marc at uberbox.org Sun Nov 29 01:13:13 2009
From: marc at uberbox.org (Marc A. Pelletier)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:13:13 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <ef59f700911281705p4b170d14p60de903693645a4a@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4B11C6EA.9060204@uberbox.org>
<20091128200456.OOE5F.332690.imail@eastrmwml41>
<ef59f700911281705p4b170d14p60de903693645a4a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4B11CAA9.1040109@uberbox.org>

Wizardman wrote:
> I third it.
> ~W


Money -> Mouth.

http://arbcom.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discus...re_David_Gerard

-- Coren / Marc
----------
From jayvdb at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 01:21:10 2009
From: jayvdb at gmail.com (John Vandenberg)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:21:10 +1100
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <c52819d30911281704n6215ab76s3f6227c22a658768@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11C6EA.9060204@uberbox.org>
<c52819d30911281704n6215ab76s3f6227c22a658768@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <deea21830911281721p6d625b04qb25e1da557dd601f@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia)
<newyorkbrad at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm also remarkably unimpressed by his posting the e-mail with the routing
> information.

The routing information only gives details about Google.

As far as I can see, the only private information is the email
address, the timezone, and the contents of the email.

This is cyber-gonzo encyclopedia writing.

> However, we probably do need to let him know we're considering action before
> we finalize anything.

We have a process. We should follow it.

Coren has started a vote on the arbcom wiki.

--
John Vandenberg
----------
From newyorkbrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 01:23:25 2009
From: newyorkbrad at gmail.com (Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia))
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:23:25 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <deea21830911281721p6d625b04qb25e1da557dd601f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11C6EA.9060204@uberbox.org>
<c52819d30911281704n6215ab76s3f6227c22a658768@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911281721p6d625b04qb25e1da557dd601f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c52819d30911281723y3a10e3bp384f965205a7b307@mail.gmail.com>

Does the process include telling the person we're considering sanctioning
that we are considering sanctioning him?

Newyorkbrad
----------
From: marc at uberbox.org (Marc A. Pelletier)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:27:47 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <c52819d30911281723y3a10e3bp384f965205a7b307@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11C6EA.9060204@uberbox.org>
<c52819d30911281704n6215ab76s3f6227c22a658768@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911281721p6d625b04qb25e1da557dd601f@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281723y3a10e3bp384f965205a7b307@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>

Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) wrote:
> Does the process include telling the person we're considering
> sanctioning that we are considering sanctioning him?
>

Not officially, and the drama is probably not worth it. But really,
Brad, we've been spending the year telling him that he needs to tone it
down several notches, and Carc has complained officially about him (with
him being copied) in the past.

He's been warned -- repeatedly.

-- Coren / Marc
----------
From jayvdb at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 01:27:59 2009
From: jayvdb at gmail.com (John Vandenberg)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:27:59 +1100
Subject: [arbcom-l] [[Andrew Landeryou]]
Message-ID: <deea21830911281727j3e3f75cr22a5b43dfe4445f0@mail.gmail.com>

subject was: Re: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now

On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Cool Hand Luke
<User.CoolHandLuke at gmail.com> wrote:
> I hate to bring this up because it's circling Wikipedia Review, but I find
> it even more troubling that Gerard's "joke" posts about Scientology, etc.
> See:
> http://davidgerard.co.uk/notes/2009/11/27/...-waste-of-skin/
>
> Somebody posted a twitter message about about vandalism then on the page of
> right-wing Australian bloger Andrew Landeryou.? In response, David Gerard
> tweeted, "mr landeryou has some history on wikipedia. (i did the sockpuppet
> investigation.)"? I think this troubling enough itself; it's unseemly for a
> current checkuser to brag about catching somebody on Wikipedia, presumably
> engaged in self-promotion.? Andrew Landeryou sent Gerard an angry email
> stating that Gerard should have talked to him before making the claim, then
> adding a threat that Mr. Landeryou would investigate Gerard if he did it
> again and it would be a "very unpleasant outcome for you, so I urge you to
> Twit more carefully in future."
>
> Gerard posts the whole thing, with headers, along with his original tweet.

The BLP was prodded by 99.35.128.68 a day ago with e/s "not the
Premier of the USSR; prod"

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w...oldid=327069534

In addition to dealing with David Gerard, we need to monitor the
content aspect as it will likely be used as a weapon by one or more
camps.

It would be good to find out what checkuser David actually performed,
what actions were taken, etc.

--
John Vandenberg
----------
From rlevse at cox.net Sun Nov 29 01:29:29 2009
From: rlevse at cox.net (rlevse at cox.net)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:29:29 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <20091128202930.WXKDM.332877.imail@eastrmwml41>

That's an understatement. Time's up.

R

---- "Marc A. Pelletier" <marc at uberbox.org> wrote:
> Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) wrote:
> > Does the process include telling the person we're considering
> > sanctioning that we are considering sanctioning him?
> >
>
> Not officially, and the drama is probably not worth it. But really,
> Brad, we've been spending the year telling him that he needs to tone it
> down several notches, and Carc has complained officially about him (with
> him being copied) in the past.
>
> He's been warned -- repeatedly.
>
> -- Coren / Marc
----------
From risker.wp at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 01:31:00 2009
From: risker.wp at gmail.com (Risker)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 01:31:00 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <20091128202930.WXKDM.332877.imail@eastrmwml41>
References: <4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>
<20091128202930.WXKDM.332877.imail@eastrmwml41>
Message-ID: <eb45e7c0911281731n3df699e6p9d8765f40859989a@mail.gmail.com>

John's started a separate thread about this and the article about Andrew
Landeryou, in which he asks about David's self-reported checkusering
involving the subject of the article.

I can't see anything obvious based on edit summaries or usernames, but it
isn't anything that has been done in the past year.

Anne
----------
From marc at uberbox.org Sun Nov 29 01:31:35 2009
From: marc at uberbox.org (Marc A. Pelletier)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:31:35 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11C6EA.9060204@uberbox.org>
<c52819d30911281704n6215ab76s3f6227c22a658768@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911281721p6d625b04qb25e1da557dd601f@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281723y3a10e3bp384f965205a7b307@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <4B11CEF7.6070705@uberbox.org>

Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
>
> He's been warned -- repeatedly.
>

Put another way, if he doesn't have enough judgment to realize that his
latest exploits would not lead to this despite the number of times his
off-wiki behavior has been raised, he doesn't have the judgment to hold
a position of trust in the first place.

-- Coren / Marc
----------
From jayvdb at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 01:31:37 2009
From: jayvdb at gmail.com (John Vandenberg)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:31:37 +1100
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11C6EA.9060204@uberbox.org>
<c52819d30911281704n6215ab76s3f6227c22a658768@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911281721p6d625b04qb25e1da557dd601f@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281723y3a10e3bp384f965205a7b307@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <deea21830911281731w4ee87713m252519517aaa59bc@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Marc A. Pelletier <marc at uberbox.org> wrote:
> Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) wrote:
>> Does the process include telling the person we're considering
>> sanctioning that we are considering sanctioning him?

Yes, that is required.

> Not officially, and the drama is probably not worth it. ?But really,
> Brad, we've been spending the year telling him that he needs to tone it
> down several notches, and Carc has complained officially about him (with
> him being copied) in the past.
>
> He's been warned -- repeatedly.

This is the procedure we agreed upon:

Level II procedures may be used if (a) the account's behaviour is
inconsistent with the level of trust required for its associated
advanced permissions, and (b) no satisfactory explanation is
forthcoming.

The procedure for removal of permissions is as follows:

1. The initiating arbitrator will (a) leave a message on the
account's talk page, asking the account to contact arbcom-l, and (b)
send a similar message to the account by Wikipedia e-mail, if enabled.
2. The initiating arbitrator will then send a message to arbcom-l
(a) stating the name of the account, (b) briefly describing the issue,
providing examples of inappropriate conduct, and © recommending
removal of permissions.
3. The Committee will then schedule deliberations on the matter.
4. A request for removal of advanced permissions may be made once a
motion to do so has been endorsed by a majority of active arbitrators.
5. Once temporary removal has been approved, an arbitrator will
post a notice, including the text of the motion and the names of
arbitrators endorsing it, to the Meta-Wiki permissions page, the
Committee's noticeboard, the administrators' noticeboard, and the
user's talk page.

<https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Procedures#Level_II_procedures>

--
John Vandenberg
----------
From marc at uberbox.org Sun Nov 29 01:33:36 2009
From: marc at uberbox.org (Marc A. Pelletier)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:33:36 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <deea21830911281731w4ee87713m252519517aaa59bc@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11C6EA.9060204@uberbox.org>
<c52819d30911281704n6215ab76s3f6227c22a658768@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911281721p6d625b04qb25e1da557dd601f@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281723y3a10e3bp384f965205a7b307@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>
<deea21830911281731w4ee87713m252519517aaa59bc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4B11CF70.6040306@uberbox.org>

John Vandenberg wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Marc A. Pelletier <marc at uberbox.org> wrote:
>
>> Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) wrote:
>>
>>> Does the process include telling the person we're considering
>>> sanctioning that we are considering sanctioning him?
>>>
>
> Yes, that is required.
>
>
>> Not officially, and the drama is probably not worth it. But really,
>> Brad, we've been spending the year telling him that he needs to tone it
>> down several notches, and Carc has complained officially about him (with
>> him being copied) in the past.
>>
>> He's been warned -- repeatedly.
>>
>
> This is the procedure we agreed upon:
>
> Level II procedures may be used if (a) the account's behaviour is
> inconsistent with the level of trust required for its associated
> advanced permissions, and (b) no satisfactory explanation is
> forthcoming.
>

Good point. My brain associations have attached this to "admin" but it
obviously applies to the other bits too. I'll handle the notifications
given I don't remember having had spats with him in the past.

-- Coren / Marc
----------
From newyorkbrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 01:34:30 2009
From: newyorkbrad at gmail.com (Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia))
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:34:30 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <deea21830911281731w4ee87713m252519517aaa59bc@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11C6EA.9060204@uberbox.org>
<c52819d30911281704n6215ab76s3f6227c22a658768@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911281721p6d625b04qb25e1da557dd601f@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281723y3a10e3bp384f965205a7b307@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>
<deea21830911281731w4ee87713m252519517aaa59bc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c52819d30911281734h426a3ca0ud6e530dcf648e438@mail.gmail.com>

I agree that his post was unacceptable. Perhaps what we should be doing is
asking him to resign. Recall the 80,000 words of drama we avoided in
Raul654's case when he agreed to resign quietly when he realized where the
committee's discussion was going. A similar outcome might be for the best
here (although of course there is no guarantee whatsoever that David would
indeed agree to resign).

Newyorkbrad
----------
From User.CoolHandLuke at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 01:37:47 2009
From: User.CoolHandLuke at gmail.com (Cool Hand Luke)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:37:47 -0600
Subject: [arbcom-l] [[Andrew Landeryou]]
In-Reply-To: <deea21830911281727j3e3f75cr22a5b43dfe4445f0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <deea21830911281727j3e3f75cr22a5b43dfe4445f0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8ec76cd10911281737r5613ee11id1ada467732445a1@mail.gmail.com>

David Gerard believed in 2006 that Landeryou was behind several vandal socks
who, among other things, vandalized articles of an acquaintance.
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/private...ary/001485.html

Frank
----------
From risker.wp at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 01:40:12 2009
From: risker.wp at gmail.com (Risker)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 01:40:12 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <4B11CF70.6040306@uberbox.org>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11C6EA.9060204@uberbox.org>
<c52819d30911281704n6215ab76s3f6227c22a658768@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911281721p6d625b04qb25e1da557dd601f@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281723y3a10e3bp384f965205a7b307@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>
<deea21830911281731w4ee87713m252519517aaa59bc@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11CF70.6040306@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <eb45e7c0911281740m317d022fid543902825d3a984@mail.gmail.com>

2009/11/29 Marc A. Pelletier <marc at uberbox.org>

> <snip>
>
> Good point. My brain associations have attached this to "admin" but it
> obviously applies to the other bits too. I'll handle the notifications
> given I don't remember having had spats with him in the past.
>
> -- Coren / Marc
>


Thanks, Marc. It's worthwhile to try to get him to step down rather than
remove the bits. We put that process in place for a lot of reasons, so it's
to our advantage to carry it out. I'll head over to the arbwiki now.

Anne
----------
From marc at uberbox.org Sun Nov 29 01:42:11 2009
From: marc at uberbox.org (Marc A. Pelletier)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:42:11 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <c52819d30911281734h426a3ca0ud6e530dcf648e438@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11C6EA.9060204@uberbox.org>
<c52819d30911281704n6215ab76s3f6227c22a658768@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911281721p6d625b04qb25e1da557dd601f@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281723y3a10e3bp384f965205a7b307@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>
<deea21830911281731w4ee87713m252519517aaa59bc@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281734h426a3ca0ud6e530dcf648e438@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4B11D173.5080609@uberbox.org>

Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) wrote:
> I agree that his post was unacceptable. Perhaps what we should be
> doing is asking him to resign. Recall the 80,000 words of drama we
> avoided in Raul654's case when he agreed to resign quietly when he
> realized where the committee's discussion was going. A similar
> outcome might be for the best here (although of course there is no
> guarantee whatsoever that David would indeed agree to resign).
>

Of course. I never have objections to an honorable withdrawal; it is
reasonable to offer him the opportunity. But we also need to make it
clear that this is under controversial circumstances.

Seppuku rather than execution? Well, it worked for the 47 ronin.

-- Coren / Marc
----------
From marc at uberbox.org Sun Nov 29 01:43:46 2009
From: marc at uberbox.org (Marc A. Pelletier)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:43:46 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] [Fwd: Copy of your message to David Gerard: Please
Contact ArbCom]
Message-ID: <4B11D1D2.1070802@uberbox.org>

Also on talk page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=327113023

-- Coren / Marc


-------- Original Message --------
Return-Path: <wiki at wikimedia.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on
beryl.uberbox.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.6 required=5.0
tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED autolearn=ham version=3.2.5
X-Original-To: marc at uberbox.org
Delivered-To: marc at uberbox.org
Received: from wiki-mail.wikimedia.org (wiki-mail.wikimedia.org
[208.80.152.133]) by mail.uberbox.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id
E6B7E1070250 for <marc at uberbox.org>; Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:40:01 -0500 (EST)
Received: from srv139.pmtpa.wmnet ([10.0.2.139]:38374) by
mchenry.wikimedia.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from
<marc at uberbox.org>) id 1NEYlc-0003c6-As for marc at uberbox.org; Sun, 29
Nov 2009 01:40:01 +0000
Received: by srv139.pmtpa.wmnet (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 29 Nov
2009 01:40:00 +0000
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 01:40:00 +0000
To: Coren <marc at uberbox.org>
Subject: Copy of your message to David Gerard: Please Contact ArbCom
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailer: MediaWiki mailer
From: Coren <marc at uberbox.org>
Message-Id: <E1NEYlc-0003c6-As at mchenry.wikimedia.org>



Hello David,

Please contact ArbCom via its mailing list (arbcom-l at lists.wikimedia.org) at your earliest convenience.

-- Coren / Marc; for the Committee

--
This e-mail was sent by user "Coren" on the English Wikipedia to user "David Gerard". It has been automatically delivered and the Wikimedia Foundation cannot be held responsible for its contents.

The sender has not been given the recipient's email address, or any information about his/her e-mail account; and the recipient has no obligation to reply to this e-mail or take any other action that might disclose his/her identity. For further information on privacy, security, and replying, as well as abuse and removal from emailing, see <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Email>.
----------
From rlevse at cox.net Sun Nov 29 01:44:12 2009
From: rlevse at cox.net (rlevse at cox.net)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:44:12 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <deea21830911281731w4ee87713m252519517aaa59bc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20091128204412.TNKZA.332988.imail@eastrmwml41>

Following process is fine, but I'm saying he's gone too far too often.

R

---- John Vandenberg <jayvdb at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Marc A. Pelletier <marc at uberbox.org> wrote:
> > Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) wrote:
> >> Does the process include telling the person we're considering
> >> sanctioning that we are considering sanctioning him?
>
> Yes, that is required.
>
> > Not officially, and the drama is probably not worth it. ?But really,
> > Brad, we've been spending the year telling him that he needs to tone it
> > down several notches, and Carc has complained officially about him (with
> > him being copied) in the past.
> >
> > He's been warned -- repeatedly.
>
> This is the procedure we agreed upon:
>
> Level II procedures may be used if (a) the account's behaviour is
> inconsistent with the level of trust required for its associated
> advanced permissions, and (b) no satisfactory explanation is
> forthcoming.
>
> The procedure for removal of permissions is as follows:
>
> 1. The initiating arbitrator will (a) leave a message on the
> account's talk page, asking the account to contact arbcom-l, and (b)
> send a similar message to the account by Wikipedia e-mail, if enabled.
> 2. The initiating arbitrator will then send a message to arbcom-l
> (a) stating the name of the account, (b) briefly describing the issue,
> providing examples of inappropriate conduct, and © recommending
> removal of permissions.
> 3. The Committee will then schedule deliberations on the matter.
> 4. A request for removal of advanced permissions may be made once a
> motion to do so has been endorsed by a majority of active arbitrators.
> 5. Once temporary removal has been approved, an arbitrator will
> post a notice, including the text of the motion and the names of
> arbitrators endorsing it, to the Meta-Wiki permissions page, the
> Committee's noticeboard, the administrators' noticeboard, and the
> user's talk page.
>
> <https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Procedures#Level_II_procedures>
>
> --
> John Vandenberg
----------
From wizardmanwiki at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 01:44:49 2009
From: wizardmanwiki at gmail.com (Wizardman)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:44:49 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <4B11D173.5080609@uberbox.org>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11C6EA.9060204@uberbox.org>
<c52819d30911281704n6215ab76s3f6227c22a658768@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911281721p6d625b04qb25e1da557dd601f@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281723y3a10e3bp384f965205a7b307@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>
<deea21830911281731w4ee87713m252519517aaa59bc@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281734h426a3ca0ud6e530dcf648e438@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11D173.5080609@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <ef59f700911281744v7d1ea489x1837a113b3f675fc@mail.gmail.com>

Hopefully someone will send him a message soon then. Give him a time limit
for a response though so this doesn't carry on forever.
~W

On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Marc A. Pelletier <marc at uberbox.org> wrote:

> Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) wrote:
> > I agree that his post was unacceptable. Perhaps what we should be
> > doing is asking him to resign. Recall the 80,000 words of drama we
> > avoided in Raul654's case when he agreed to resign quietly when he
> > realized where the committee's discussion was going. A similar
> > outcome might be for the best here (although of course there is no
> > guarantee whatsoever that David would indeed agree to resign).
> >
>
> Of course. I never have objections to an honorable withdrawal; it is
> reasonable to offer him the opportunity. But we also need to make it
> clear that this is under controversial circumstances.
>
> Seppuku rather than execution? Well, it worked for the 47 ronin.
>
> -- Coren / Marc
-----------
From marc at uberbox.org Sun Nov 29 01:58:00 2009
From: marc at uberbox.org (Marc A. Pelletier)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:58:00 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <ef59f700911281744v7d1ea489x1837a113b3f675fc@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11C6EA.9060204@uberbox.org>
<c52819d30911281704n6215ab76s3f6227c22a658768@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911281721p6d625b04qb25e1da557dd601f@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281723y3a10e3bp384f965205a7b307@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>
<deea21830911281731w4ee87713m252519517aaa59bc@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281734h426a3ca0ud6e530dcf648e438@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11D173.5080609@uberbox.org>
<ef59f700911281744v7d1ea489x1837a113b3f675fc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4B11D528.4010008@uberbox.org>

Wizardman wrote:
> Hopefully someone will send him a message soon then. Give him a time
> limit for a response though so this doesn't carry on forever.
> ~W

[Draft -- not sent]

Hello David,

You recent blog post (see link at the end) has come to the attention of
the Committee, and we are disappointed that you were unable or unwilling
to heed the concerns expressed by the arbitrators and other
functionaries over the past year. Such outbursts are completely
unacceptable as they reflect poorly on the project and, given your
status as a functionary, particularly damaging. In particular,
disclosing past checkuser results (especially with a bragging tone) and
publishing email including private information are not compatible with
the trust and decorum expected of holders of advanced rights.

Given the warnings you have already received on that subject, the
Committee is voting to suspend both checkuser and oversight permissions,
and to remove you from the func-l mailing list. It appears at this time
that the motion will carry, but we wanted to extend the opportunity of
stepping down willingly of your own volition beforehand to reduce the
likelihood of drama and the possible embarrassment.

If you have comments to offer, please respond to this email before Dec
2; at which point we will otherwise close the pending motion.

For the Committee, Marc A. Pelletier (Coren)

http://davidgerard.co.uk/notes/2009/11/27/...-waste-of-skin/


[end draft]

-- Coren / Marc
----------
From wizardmanwiki at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 02:00:48 2009
From: wizardmanwiki at gmail.com (Wizardman)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 21:00:48 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <4B11D528.4010008@uberbox.org>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281704n6215ab76s3f6227c22a658768@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911281721p6d625b04qb25e1da557dd601f@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281723y3a10e3bp384f965205a7b307@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>
<deea21830911281731w4ee87713m252519517aaa59bc@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281734h426a3ca0ud6e530dcf648e438@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11D173.5080609@uberbox.org>
<ef59f700911281744v7d1ea489x1837a113b3f675fc@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11D528.4010008@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <ef59f700911281800p63083976g32036a72a96727e6@mail.gmail.com>

Looks good to me. I'd even move it up to the 1st, though that is reducing
the time quite a bit.
~W
----------
From User.CoolHandLuke at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 02:02:42 2009
From: User.CoolHandLuke at gmail.com (Cool Hand Luke)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:02:42 -0600
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <ef59f700911281800p63083976g32036a72a96727e6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911281721p6d625b04qb25e1da557dd601f@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281723y3a10e3bp384f965205a7b307@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>
<deea21830911281731w4ee87713m252519517aaa59bc@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281734h426a3ca0ud6e530dcf648e438@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11D173.5080609@uberbox.org>
<ef59f700911281744v7d1ea489x1837a113b3f675fc@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11D528.4010008@uberbox.org>
<ef59f700911281800p63083976g32036a72a96727e6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8ec76cd10911281802p3e696596hfd74e89ba6ab0ea3@mail.gmail.com>

Good to me too. Although I would second kicking it up to the 1st. Is the
2nd so that it doesn't collide with first day voting drama?

Frank
----------
From marc at uberbox.org Sun Nov 29 02:05:26 2009
From: marc at uberbox.org (Marc A. Pelletier)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 21:05:26 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <4B11D645.5040302@uberbox.org>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281704n6215ab76s3f6227c22a658768@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911281721p6d625b04qb25e1da557dd601f@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281723y3a10e3bp384f965205a7b307@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>
<deea21830911281731w4ee87713m252519517aaa59bc@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281734h426a3ca0ud6e530dcf648e438@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11D173.5080609@uberbox.org>
<ef59f700911281744v7d1ea489x1837a113b3f675fc@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11D528.4010008@uberbox.org>
<ef59f700911281800p63083976g32036a72a96727e6@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11D645.5040302@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <4B11D6E6.8010303@uberbox.org>

Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
> Wizardman wrote:
>
>> Looks good to me. I'd even move it up to the 1st, though that is
>> reducing the time quite a bit.
>> ~W
>>
>
> It's a weekend; I didn't want to be unreasonable either.
>
> -- Coren / Marc
>
>

That being said, at least four of us said 1st or 48h. I'll set with Dec
1 as the deadline (which will still give two whole days including a weekday)

-- Coren / Marc
----------
From marc at uberbox.org Sun Nov 29 02:13:03 2009
From: marc at uberbox.org (Marc A. Pelletier)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 21:13:03 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Motion regarding your recent blog post
Message-ID: <4B11D8AF.2040102@uberbox.org>

Hello David,

You recent blog post (see link at the end) has come to the attention of
the Committee, and we are disappointed that you were unable or unwilling
to heed the concerns expressed by the arbitrators and other
functionaries over the past year. Such outbursts are completely
unacceptable as they reflect poorly on the project and, given your
status as a functionary, are particularly damaging. In particular,
disclosing past checkuser results (especially in a bragging tone) and
publishing email including private information are not compatible with
the trust and decorum expected of holders of advanced rights.

Given the warnings you have already received on that subject, the
Committee is voting to suspend both checkuser and oversight permissions,
and to remove you from the func-l mailing list. It appears at this time
that the motion will carry, but we wanted to extend the opportunity of
stepping down of your own volition beforehand to reduce the likelihood
of drama and the possible embarrassment.

If you have comments to offer, please respond to this email before
2009-12-01; at which point we will otherwise close the pending motion.

For the Committee, Marc A. Pelletier (Coren)

ref: http://davidgerard.co.uk/notes/2009/11/27/...-waste-of-skin/
----------
From jayvdb at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 02:14:10 2009
From: jayvdb at gmail.com (John Vandenberg)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 13:14:10 +1100
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <4B11D62A.4040204@uberbox.org>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911281721p6d625b04qb25e1da557dd601f@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281723y3a10e3bp384f965205a7b307@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>
<deea21830911281731w4ee87713m252519517aaa59bc@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281734h426a3ca0ud6e530dcf648e438@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11D173.5080609@uberbox.org>
<ef59f700911281744v7d1ea489x1837a113b3f675fc@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11D528.4010008@uberbox.org> <4B11D62A.4040204@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <deea21830911281814i5e325035s2d8c49126405b79a@mail.gmail.com>

I'm not opposed to this draft .. but .. ;-)

I dont think we should be focused on asking him to stand down _in
order to_ minimise drama. We should be asking him to stand down _in a
manner_ which minimises drama. i.e. he needs to admit that he has
been a twit, and accepts the consequences.

I doubt there will be drama if we did it ; I suspect that there will
be drama if he is allowed to frame it however he wants. even more
drama if there is no explanation at all.
----------
From marc at uberbox.org Sun Nov 29 02:14:32 2009
From: marc at uberbox.org (Marc A. Pelletier)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 21:14:32 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Motion regarding your recent blog post
In-Reply-To: <4B11D8AF.2040102@uberbox.org>
References: <4B11D8AF.2040102@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <4B11D908.6000306@uberbox.org>

[list only]

Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
> Hello David,
>

I went ahead despite the limited feedback given we intend to move
swiftly; the short delay makes it imperative that he is notified as
quickly as possible to give him the whole two days.

-- Coren / Marc
----------
From marc at uberbox.org Sun Nov 29 02:17:43 2009
From: marc at uberbox.org (Marc A. Pelletier)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 21:17:43 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <deea21830911281814i5e325035s2d8c49126405b79a@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911281721p6d625b04qb25e1da557dd601f@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281723y3a10e3bp384f965205a7b307@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>
<deea21830911281731w4ee87713m252519517aaa59bc@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281734h426a3ca0ud6e530dcf648e438@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11D173.5080609@uberbox.org>
<ef59f700911281744v7d1ea489x1837a113b3f675fc@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11D528.4010008@uberbox.org> <4B11D62A.4040204@uberbox.org>
<deea21830911281814i5e325035s2d8c49126405b79a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4B11D9C7.7040507@uberbox.org>

John Vandenberg wrote:
> I'm not opposed to this draft .. but .. ;-)
>

Too late for but(t)s. :-)

At any rate, reducing drama pretty much implies that he shouldn't raise
it himself. I don't expect he'll go down quietly, though, and we're
more likely than not going to have to do so forcibly and publicly.
More's the pity.

-- Coren / Marc
-----------
From User.CoolHandLuke at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 02:56:52 2009
From: User.CoolHandLuke at gmail.com (Cool Hand Luke)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:56:52 -0600
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <deea21830911281814i5e325035s2d8c49126405b79a@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281723y3a10e3bp384f965205a7b307@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org>
<deea21830911281731w4ee87713m252519517aaa59bc@mail.gmail.com>
<c52819d30911281734h426a3ca0ud6e530dcf648e438@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11D173.5080609@uberbox.org>
<ef59f700911281744v7d1ea489x1837a113b3f675fc@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11D528.4010008@uberbox.org> <4B11D62A.4040204@uberbox.org>
<deea21830911281814i5e325035s2d8c49126405b79a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8ec76cd10911281856h1b73626fwaf487be0f00cd662@mail.gmail.com>

Yes, I think you are right that there will be *relatively* little drama if
we forcibly removed him. He's not in the middle of a Giano/Bishonen
intrigue, and would be hard pressed to frame this as ArbCom 2009
incompetence. His post was just plain stupid.

That said, it's still relative drama, and I agree that we would prefer him
to withdraw in a classy way like Raul654. However, he doesn't seem to like
us--I doubt he will want to make it drama-free, even for the sake of the
project. I think you're right that we should expect some kicking.

Frank




On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 8:14 PM, John Vandenberg <jayvdb at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm not opposed to this draft .. but .. ;-)
>
> I dont think we should be focused on asking him to stand down _in
> order to_ minimise drama. We should be asking him to stand down _in a
> manner_ which minimises drama. i.e. he needs to admit that he has
> been a twit, and accepts the consequences.
>
> I doubt there will be drama if we did it ; I suspect that there will
> be drama if he is allowed to frame it however he wants. even more
> drama if there is no explanation at all.
----------
From rlevse at cox.net Sun Nov 29 03:53:44 2009
From: rlevse at cox.net (Randy Everette)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 22:53:44 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
In-Reply-To: <4B11D9C7.7040507@uberbox.org>
References: <8ec76cd10911281648qaca4d5dmf9b9b3eca5956cda@mail.gmail.com> <deea21830911281721p6d625b04qb25e1da557dd601f@mail.gmail.com> <c52819d30911281723y3a10e3bp384f965205a7b307@mail.gmail.com> <4B11CE13.4040202@uberbox.org> <deea21830911281731w4ee87713m252519517aaa59bc@mail.gmail.com> <c52819d30911281734h426a3ca0ud6e530dcf648e438@mail.gmail.com> <4B11D173.5080609@uberbox.org> <ef59f700911281744v7d1ea489x1837a113b3f675fc@mail.gmail.com> <4B11D528.4010008@uberbox.org>
<4B11D62A.4040204@uberbox.org> <deea21830911281814i5e325035s2d8c49126405b79a@mail.gmail.com>
<4B11D9C7.7040507@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <01ff01ca70a7$8bdfcdb0$a39f6910$@net>

But he can't say he didn't have his chance now.

R

-----Original Message-----
From: arbcom-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:arbcom-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Marc A. Pelletier
Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2009 9:18 PM
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list
Subject: Re: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now

John Vandenberg wrote:
> I'm not opposed to this draft .. but .. ;-)
>
-----------
From: szvest at gmail.com (Fayssal F.)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 11:02:05 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] David Gerard again - I move we remove his CU bit now
Message-ID: <2a8c5680911290302h177717b3p50b59d0c443dfb84@mail.gmail.com>

I am supporting every measure that has been taken so far. The unacceptable
behaviour of David shows that he's not fit for the trusting job (not
acceptable even for an admin). Imagine law enforcement officers bragging
online about their actions and ridiculing people via multiple venues
(twitter, blog, etc). It's a pity to see people in their 40's or so getting
themselves dragged into such childish attitudes.

That's was the real drama, not what would follow! Our job is to protect the
integrity of this project and this is what we should focus on.

Fayssal F.
----------
From dgerard at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 11:14:27 2009
From: dgerard at gmail.com (David Gerard)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 11:14:27 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Please Contact ArbCom
In-Reply-To: <E1NEYlb-0003an-A3@mchenry.wikimedia.org>
References: <E1NEYlb-0003an-A3@mchenry.wikimedia.org>
Message-ID: <fbad4e140911290314ode8100v7fc4463eb32019d6@mail.gmail.com>

Cheers, and what on earth?


- d.



2009/11/29 Coren <marc at uberbox.org>:
> Hello David,
>
> Please contact ArbCom via its mailing list (arbcom-l at lists.wikimedia.org) at your earliest convenience.
>
> -- Coren / Marc; for the Committee
>
----------
From sydney.poore at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 12:15:37 2009
From: sydney.poore at gmail.com (FloNight)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 07:15:37 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] [Functionaries-en] Fwd: Motion regarding your recent
blog post
In-Reply-To: <deea21830911290405v2bec8237w4b737fb127687f4c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4B11D8AF.2040102@uberbox.org>
<fbad4e140911290319v7a480584q432f14239e0389b5@mail.gmail.com>
<fbad4e140911290320x4b331038m4204439d6ac17645@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911290405v2bec8237w4b737fb127687f4c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <16032ea0911290415s3a9f9bc9tfdf48318b4a35733@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 7:05 AM, John Vandenberg <jayvdb at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 10:46 PM, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2009/11/29 John Vandenberg <jayvdb at gmail.com>:
> >> David, do you want this discussion to be conducted on functionaries-en ?
> > Actually, it should be conducted publicly on the wiki.
>
> I'll take that as a yes.
>
> If you don't discuss it with us privately, the next action from the
> committee will be a motion on the noticeboard.


(ArbCom list only)

David has taken this pubic on his talk page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dav..._contact_ArbCom

He mentions the past caution but does it in a way that dismisses the
problem.

Sydney
----------
From jayvdb at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 12:24:59 2009
From: jayvdb at gmail.com (John Vandenberg)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 23:24:59 +1100
Subject: [arbcom-l] [Functionaries-en] Fwd: Motion regarding your recent
blog post
In-Reply-To: <16032ea0911290415s3a9f9bc9tfdf48318b4a35733@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4B11D8AF.2040102@uberbox.org>
<fbad4e140911290319v7a480584q432f14239e0389b5@mail.gmail.com>
<fbad4e140911290320x4b331038m4204439d6ac17645@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911290405v2bec8237w4b737fb127687f4c@mail.gmail.com>
<16032ea0911290415s3a9f9bc9tfdf48318b4a35733@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <deea21830911290424x2c0e8e3g9c3f563325e358a1@mail.gmail.com>

I say we publish? he can appeal. that is how the level II procedure works.

On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 11:15 PM, FloNight <sydney.poore at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 7:05 AM, John Vandenberg <jayvdb at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 10:46 PM, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > 2009/11/29 John Vandenberg <jayvdb at gmail.com>:
>> >> David, do you want this discussion to be conducted on functionaries-en
>> >> ?
>> > Actually, it should be conducted publicly on the wiki.
>>
>> I'll take that as a yes.
>>
>> If you don't discuss it with us privately, the next action from the
>> committee will be a motion on the noticeboard.
>
> (ArbCom list only)
>
> David has taken this pubic on his talk page.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dav..._contact_ArbCom
>
> He mentions the past caution but does it in a way that dismisses the
> problem.
>
> Sydney
>
> _______________________________________________
> arbcom-l mailing list
> arbcom-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l
>
----------
From rlevse at cox.net Sun Nov 29 12:34:30 2009
From: rlevse at cox.net (Randy Everette)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 07:34:30 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] [Functionaries-en] Fwd: Motion regarding your
recent blog post
In-Reply-To: <deea21830911290424x2c0e8e3g9c3f563325e358a1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4B11D8AF.2040102@uberbox.org> <fbad4e140911290319v7a480584q432f14239e0389b5@mail.gmail.com> <fbad4e140911290320x4b331038m4204439d6ac17645@mail.gmail.com> <deea21830911290405v2bec8237w4b737fb127687f4c@mail.gmail.com> <16032ea0911290415s3a9f9bc9tfdf48318b4a35733@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911290424x2c0e8e3g9c3f563325e358a1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <022101ca70f0$4c01f8a0$e405e9e0$@net>

Yep. Publish it.
----------
From jayvdb at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 12:37:43 2009
From: jayvdb at gmail.com (John Vandenberg)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 23:37:43 +1100
Subject: [arbcom-l] [Functionaries-en] Fwd: Motion regarding your recent
blog post
In-Reply-To: <022101ca70f0$4c01f8a0$e405e9e0$@net>
References: <4B11D8AF.2040102@uberbox.org>
<fbad4e140911290319v7a480584q432f14239e0389b5@mail.gmail.com>
<fbad4e140911290320x4b331038m4204439d6ac17645@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911290405v2bec8237w4b737fb127687f4c@mail.gmail.com>
<16032ea0911290415s3a9f9bc9tfdf48318b4a35733@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911290424x2c0e8e3g9c3f563325e358a1@mail.gmail.com>
<022101ca70f0$4c01f8a0$e405e9e0$@net>
Message-ID: <deea21830911290437j40d8646ncfc77228f5c4710@mail.gmail.com>

Ready to roll - minor changes being the stripped->revoked, and
mentioning level II procedures at the end.

Subject: David Gerard (we used "nichalp' )

For repeatedly failing to maintain proper decorum in public fora, and
for unwarranted dissemination of private data acquired using
privileged rights, checkuser and oversight rights are revoked from
{{user|David Gerard}}, and he is removed from the functionary list
effective immediately, in accordance with
[[Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Procedures#Level_II_procedures|Level
II procedures]]. ~~~~

* Support: Cool Hand Luke, Coren, FloNight, John Vandenberg,
Newyorkbrad, Rlevse, Risker, Stephen Bain, Wizardman
* Oppose: None
* Abstain: None
* Not voting: Carcharoth, Roger Davies, Vassyana
* Inactive: FayssalF

Carcharoth could be placed under inactive as he has told us that he is
away for the weekend
----------
From sydney.poore at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 12:44:35 2009
From: sydney.poore at gmail.com (FloNight)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 07:44:35 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] [Functionaries-en] Fwd: Motion regarding your recent
blog post
In-Reply-To: <deea21830911290437j40d8646ncfc77228f5c4710@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4B11D8AF.2040102@uberbox.org>
<fbad4e140911290319v7a480584q432f14239e0389b5@mail.gmail.com>
<fbad4e140911290320x4b331038m4204439d6ac17645@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911290405v2bec8237w4b737fb127687f4c@mail.gmail.com>
<16032ea0911290415s3a9f9bc9tfdf48318b4a35733@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911290424x2c0e8e3g9c3f563325e358a1@mail.gmail.com>
<022101ca70f0$4c01f8a0$e405e9e0$@net>
<deea21830911290437j40d8646ncfc77228f5c4710@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <16032ea0911290444i6df6961egad47daab1ab45392@mail.gmail.com>

I agree that we publish the motion. But then what comes next?

We need to be ready to roll into the next phase.

Sydney
-----------
From jayvdb at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 12:47:15 2009
From: jayvdb at gmail.com (John Vandenberg)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 23:47:15 +1100
Subject: [arbcom-l] [Functionaries-en] Fwd: Motion regarding your recent
blog post
In-Reply-To: <16032ea0911290444i6df6961egad47daab1ab45392@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4B11D8AF.2040102@uberbox.org>
<fbad4e140911290319v7a480584q432f14239e0389b5@mail.gmail.com>
<fbad4e140911290320x4b331038m4204439d6ac17645@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911290405v2bec8237w4b737fb127687f4c@mail.gmail.com>
<16032ea0911290415s3a9f9bc9tfdf48318b4a35733@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911290424x2c0e8e3g9c3f563325e358a1@mail.gmail.com>
<022101ca70f0$4c01f8a0$e405e9e0$@net>
<deea21830911290437j40d8646ncfc77228f5c4710@mail.gmail.com>
<16032ea0911290444i6df6961egad47daab1ab45392@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <deea21830911290447l1acac01br118e1156fa382044@mail.gmail.com>

motion posted. meta request done.

Im about to request that he be removed from the lists.
-----------
From jayvdb at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 12:56:43 2009
From: jayvdb at gmail.com (John Vandenberg)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 23:56:43 +1100
Subject: [arbcom-l] [Functionaries-en] Fwd: Motion regarding your recent
blog post
In-Reply-To: <deea21830911290447l1acac01br118e1156fa382044@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4B11D8AF.2040102@uberbox.org>
<fbad4e140911290319v7a480584q432f14239e0389b5@mail.gmail.com>
<fbad4e140911290320x4b331038m4204439d6ac17645@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911290405v2bec8237w4b737fb127687f4c@mail.gmail.com>
<16032ea0911290415s3a9f9bc9tfdf48318b4a35733@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911290424x2c0e8e3g9c3f563325e358a1@mail.gmail.com>
<022101ca70f0$4c01f8a0$e405e9e0$@net>
<deea21830911290437j40d8646ncfc77228f5c4710@mail.gmail.com>
<16032ea0911290444i6df6961egad47daab1ab45392@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911290447l1acac01br118e1156fa382044@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <deea21830911290456h7264c478sffa7a890be7155cd@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 11:47 PM, John Vandenberg <jayvdb at gmail.com> wrote:
> motion posted. ?meta request done.

tools removed by a steward.

> Im about to request that he be removed from the lists.

list admins notified.

--
John Vandenberg
----------
From dgerard at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 12:58:13 2009
From: dgerard at gmail.com (David Gerard)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:58:13 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] [Functionaries-en] Fwd: Motion regarding your recent
blog post
In-Reply-To: <deea21830911290451o748a13c0ta7c2a56e0aaa4362@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4B11D8AF.2040102@uberbox.org>
<fbad4e140911290319v7a480584q432f14239e0389b5@mail.gmail.com>
<fbad4e140911290320x4b331038m4204439d6ac17645@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911290405v2bec8237w4b737fb127687f4c@mail.gmail.com>
<deea21830911290451o748a13c0ta7c2a56e0aaa4362@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <fbad4e140911290458k7ccbcf27ma8a3780fc6a2c2c3@mail.gmail.com>

2009/11/29 John Vandenberg <jayvdb at gmail.com>:
> On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 11:05 PM, John Vandenberg <jayvdb at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 10:46 PM, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2009/11/29 John Vandenberg <jayvdb at gmail.com>:
>>>> David, do you want this discussion to be conducted on functionaries-en ?
>>> Actually, it should be conducted publicly on the wiki.
>>
>> I'll take that as a yes.
>>
>> If you don't discuss it with us privately, the next action from the
>> committee will be a motion on the noticeboard.
>
> David decided to conduct this