The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> FT2 accuses Arbcom
Eppur si muove
post Tue 29th November 2011, 3:32am
Post #21


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 304
Joined: Fri 28th Nov 2008, 10:50pm
Member No.: 9,171



QUOTE(Peter Damian @ Mon 28th November 2011, 9:34pm) *

QUOTE(that one guy @ Mon 28th November 2011, 9:19pm) *

Ah... transparency... or lack there of. Did Mallice post the discussion of the FT2 email on the forums and if so what thread?


He did, and I have a full set of links here:

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=34246

The Anvil itself is inside the thread here http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showt...22&#entry278722 . Search for "please read what follows and believe it".

All names and addresses have been redacted.

Ah thanks. This helps explain lots of things such as what everyone is going on about and why that interesting and intelligent Cato guy isn't posting here any more but not why a certain ex-senior civil servant is still on his synagogue committee (or may be that's someone else with the same name). I can't say I blame FT2 or anyone else for gunning for him. It's the oversighting that seems more abusive.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Peter Damian
post Tue 29th November 2011, 8:25am
Post #22


I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,400
Joined: Tue 18th Dec 2007, 9:25pm
Member No.: 4,212

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Somey @ Mon 28th November 2011, 11:35pm) *

But I personally recall that it didn't seem quite so over-the-top at the time, and even I thought that it had to be tried, in the same way that you have to try telling your neighbor you're going to call the cops on his teenage son who's been trying to kill your dog before you actually call them.


Of course, a lot of people on Wikipedia Review supported this. It happens to be against UK law to send threatening emails, but anyway that's not the point. The point is that with one exception the arbitrators were horrified by the sockpuppeter's actions, yet they did nothing about it, and when they realised they had to, and it was too late, they resorted to other blackmailing tactics. Kirill writes on Nov 30 last year

QUOTE

We should also consider the possibility that we will be asked why we did not
strip him of functionary status; I don't know that we have a good answer,
but we really need to have one ready before we publish anything.


Risker then prepared a statement given a sort of explanation of why they had not stripped FT2 of functionary status.

However, when an opportunity to blackmail FT2 into resigning was found, they chose that, and did not publish this statement. That was dishonourable, and is what Wikipedians call 'misleading the community'.

QUOTE

From risker.wp at gmail.com Tue Nov 30 03:15:14 2010
On 24 February 2010, FT2 contacted the Arbitration Committee by email to
request return of Checkuser permissions for the purpose of participating in
a specific sockpuppetry investigation. At that time, an email written by FT2
came to the attention of the entire Arbitration Committee. The email was
addressed to an abusive sockpuppeter who had been banned from English
Wikipedia and some other WMF projects as a result of a cross-wiki
investigation in which FT2 played a significant role. In the email, FT2
threatened to contact family members of the sockpuppeter directly, and laid
out a series of conditions including those external to Wikipedia with the
threat of contacting employers, government agencies, and others about the
nature of the socking. It was known at the time this email was disclosed to
the Committee ''en banc'' that the conditions outlined in FT2's email had
not been met, and there was concern that he might proceed with the actions
he had threatened in the email.

FT2 confirmed that the text of the email was
correct and implied that the content had been vetted in advance by a WMF
staff member and a WMF board member. Both denied having read the email at
any point. FT2 was also asked to provide further details of that particular
investigation, which he had refused to share with at least one sitting
member of the arbitration committee at the time of the investigation. The
discussion was largely abandoned about six weeks later. No formal decision
had been made because the Committee had not yet received the further
information requested.

In May 2010, FT2 advised the Arbitration Committee that he had now returned
from his wikibreak and requested both checkuser and oversight tools. He
acknowledged that he had not responded to the prior requests, and promised
to do so promptly. He did not provide that information to the Committee or,
to the best of our knowledge, any Committee member, from that point
forward. Because the Arbitration Committee never received the requested
information, and thus our investigation was incomplete, there was never a
formal vote on whether or not to reinstate FT2's checkuser and/or oversight
permissions. However, over the course of the two separate discussions, a
minimum of seven Arbitration Committee members expressed serious concerns
and/or outright opposition to returning checkuser to FT2.
[...]


This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Tue 29th November 2011, 8:26am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ottava
post Tue 29th November 2011, 2:59pm
Post #23


Über Pokemon
********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,917
Joined: Thu 31st Jul 2008, 6:35pm
Member No.: 7,328

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Peter Damian @ Tue 29th November 2011, 3:25am) *

QUOTE(Somey @ Mon 28th November 2011, 11:35pm) *

But I personally recall that it didn't seem quite so over-the-top at the time, and even I thought that it had to be tried, in the same way that you have to try telling your neighbor you're going to call the cops on his teenage son who's been trying to kill your dog before you actually call them.


Of course, a lot of people on Wikipedia Review supported this. It happens to be against UK law to send threatening emails, but anyway that's not the point.



Why not make it the point?

A Horse was banned for contacting a school. ArbCom put a clear precedence but yet ignores it when it came to FT2, and, as I pointed out, others who happen to be in their favor.

As you stated, his action was criminal, as with many other people in power. The people running Wikipedia are basically aiding those who are wielding power to harass. Bad, no?

But you are filing a complaint about WMUK, which is connecting themselves to this. This is a power structure that the WMUK claims to be able to work with yet is endorsing criminal activity. They also sat back and did nothing as thousands of images were looted. So harassing people online (now a big offense in the UK), taking lots of UK copyrighted images, allowing people to violate UK law by pretending to be other people for various ways of harassing an enemy (not just Poetlister, but how about Sam Blacketeer and the guy who edited articles on his journalist rivals?), etc.

You have a pattern of endorsed criminality that is almost the culture itself. Then there is the little note I sent you via email which has a lot of ramifications - if the servers are subpoenaed, there will be some interesting findings about a lot of money that may have just "vanished".

And the people who have been Arbitrators for more than a year are all culpable in some way for this culture of illegality, which is verified by the many leaked emails. Hell, look at their stance on copyright infringement - there was proof that 7 of the Arbs were plagiarist, yet it took a year and some before one finally got banned. It is amazing that it took so long for Rlevse to be dealt with when I sent emails to many people, including SandyGeorgia, 6 months after my ban.

This post has been edited by Ottava: Tue 29th November 2011, 3:01pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 29th 3 17, 7:17am