|
|
|
Outrageous, ArbCom puts field hand Giano in his place |
|
|
Proabivouac |
|
Bane of all wikiland
Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,246
Joined:
Member No.: 2,647
|
My earlier comment, QUOTE “Against this backdrop, the predictable refrain "let's get back to editing" translates as a command for proles to leave the palatial grounds of the noticeboards and get back to work while administrators call the shots.†http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&sh...indpost&p=62131proves uncannily prescient, as the Arbitration Committee considers this finding: QUOTE “For a period of one year, Giano may not participate in any of the pages of the "Wikipedia:" or "Wikipedia talk" namespaces, except for civil discussion related to featured articles.†http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=174409847
|
|
|
|
GlassBeadGame |
|
Dharma Bum
Group: Contributors
Posts: 7,919
Joined:
From: My name it means nothing. My age it means less. The country I come from is called the Mid-West.
Member No.: 981
|
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Wed 28th November 2007, 7:29pm) My earlier comment, QUOTE “Against this backdrop, the predictable refrain "let's get back to editing" translates as a command for proles to leave the palatial grounds of the noticeboards and get back to work while administrators call the shots.†http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&sh...indpost&p=62131proves uncannily prescient, as the Arbitration Committee considers this finding: QUOTE “For a period of one year, Giano may not participate in any of the pages of the "Wikipedia:" or "Wikipedia talk" namespaces, except for civil discussion related to featured articles.†http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=174409847I guess that would preclude his serving on ArbCom.
|
|
|
|
Disillusioned Lackey |
|
Unregistered
|
QUOTE(jorge @ Wed 28th November 2007, 6:51pm) Apparently Giano has been engaged in wimpy disruption. (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif) I still think this whole thing might have been a scam to rule Giano out of the Arbcom. Since Jimbo has final say, he was already out, no? This is just a slap in the face, to put him in his place for insulting said God-king.
|
|
|
|
Disillusioned Lackey |
|
Unregistered
|
QUOTE THEN WHAT ARE YOU CAPABLE OF, SIR?[/b]Regardless, this action delayed and complicated any action the committee might have taken by taking a straight-forward case of administrator misconduct and transforming it into some of a power-struggle; the comments made by many over the last few days leave no doubt that many editors see the matter in those terms. This did not have to happen; this is not the first time this has happened. This committee is empowered to resolve disputes according to the policies by which this project is governed. We are not a political institution. We are not capable of dispensing truth or justice. We exist to protect the encyclopedia and maintain the conditions necessary for collaborative editing. If it is necessary to flout our core policies to keep this committee "honest" then all is lost and I cannot endorse such a position. Well, in a nutshell, since Durova got the big whopper, and since !! is a saint, then Giano had to pay. It an't all run against favor of the ruling party. let's parse here. QUOTE taking a straight-forward case of administrator misconduct and transforming it into some of a power-struggle; No, sorry. The problem was that the behavior, and its having been condoned, is part of a systematic problem, and your consistent refusal to deal with that is what you now call a power struggle. It is you sir, with the power, who are making the struggle. And that struggle is with reality, and truth (which you admit you can't deal well with, nor honesty - wow, WHAT a Freudian slip, God almighty) QUOTE This committee is empowered to resolve disputes according to the policies by which this project is governed. Look Mackensen-Hancock-Jefferson-speechmaker. No one asked you to rewrite the Magna Carta. You simply have to reference the rules (not even follow them according to Ignore all rules), and try to be fair. That is part and parcel of protecting the encyclopedic environment, but you go on to say... QUOTE We are not a political institution. We are not capable of dispensing truth or justice. We exist to protect the encyclopedia and maintain the conditions necessary for collaborative editing.
Are only political institutions required to be fair, transparent, and not lie? To not exact cruelty? Because when I was in a scout troop, it wasn't a political institution, and there were rules, but no one performed gross acts of injustice and then whined that they weren't a political institution, as if this would have excused gross unfairness, which it does not. Neither did it excuse the Catholic Church from condoning gross acts of injustice, and the Catholic Church is also not a political institution. And by the way WHAT have you been smoking, Sir Platitudes?? QUOTE We are not capable of dispensing truth or justice. We exist to protect the encyclopedia and maintain the conditions necessary for collaborative editing.
Dear Mr. Fallacious Logic: Do you contend that these two sentences are mutually exclusive? Because that is how this reads. Explain pls thx. QUOTE If it is necessary to flout our core policies to keep this committee "honest" then all is lost and I cannot endorse such a position. You are making NO sense, Mr. Mackensen. What core policies have you flouted to keep your committee honest? I though that the issue here was that in being DISHONEST, you had flouted the committee (and the community's) policies. That's the point isn't it? And you are on that list, Mr. Mackensen, the secret list which made all those backdoor decisions, aren't you Mr. Mackensen. So is this why Mr. Mackensen, you are spouting out sentences which back to back make no logical sense whatsoever? What core policy allows you to perform judgements without due process? I know you are arguing against transparency, Mr. Mackensen, but what you are really doing is claiming that the core policy of the committee is secrecy, collusion, backhandedness, cronyism and corruption.[/b] And since you are being asked to stop performing these, you feel that "all is lost" MR MACKENSEN. ALL THAT IS LOST IS YOUR FACE. RESIGN ARBCOM, and GIVE IT BACK SOME DIGNITY.Other people can manage truth and honesty just fine, if you feel overly challenged and not up to the task. This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey:
|
|
|
|
Disillusioned Lackey |
|
Unregistered
|
QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Wed 28th November 2007, 8:18pm) Proposed sanction now stands at 3/1/1 with Fred, jpgordon and Mackensen supporting. Paul August opposes. UnivitedCompany abstains. Who else is going to vote for political repression?
Well, duh. Jpgordon and Mackensen are on the CORRUPT list. (oops i meant the sekrit list) And Fred? Well, let's not go there. Of course Mackensen+jpgordon want to punish Giano. Someone on the other side has to go down, if Durova did. So says the corrupt Arbcom Committee that Durova so steadfastly trusted to protect her in any situation.. .. but could not under strong public scrutiny. Ergo Giano must PAY.
|
|
|
|
GlassBeadGame |
|
Dharma Bum
Group: Contributors
Posts: 7,919
Joined:
From: My name it means nothing. My age it means less. The country I come from is called the Mid-West.
Member No.: 981
|
|
|
|
|
the fieryangel |
|
the Internet Review Corporation is watching you...
Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,990
Joined:
From: It's all in your mind anyway...
Member No.: 577
|
Has anyone seen this "remedy"??? QUOTE Remedy suspended
2.1) Any remedy which restricts Giano from the Wikipedia namespace shall be suspended until the conclusion of the ArbCom elections, and will be lifted should Giano be appointed to the Committee. For the moment, this is 4/0/0/0, but....I'm just speechless. If he wins the election, then he gets off? If he doesn't, then he's punished? Do they think at all? How can they not see the implications in this? This is just too much. Okay, that's it! I'm changing my vote! GIANO for ARBCOM!!! This post has been edited by the fieryangel:
|
|
|
|
jorge |
|
Postmaster
Group: On Vacation
Posts: 1,910
Joined:
Member No.: 29
|
QUOTE(Disillusioned Lackey @ Thu 29th November 2007, 1:00am) QUOTE(jorge @ Wed 28th November 2007, 6:51pm) Apparently Giano has been engaged in wimpy disruption. (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif) I still think this whole thing might have been a scam to rule Giano out of the Arbcom. Since Jimbo has final say, he was already out, no? This is just a slap in the face, to put him in his place for insulting said God-king. Well, if all this Durovadrama hadn't happened Giano wouldn't have been seen as a person involved in a current dispute so it would be harder for Jimbo Wimbo to reject him.
|
|
|
|
Fox |
|
New Member
Group: Contributors
Posts: 30
Joined:
Member No.: 3,960
|
I have a sad feeling that Giano getting forced into this as a party was an attempt to discredit him to keep him off of the ArbCom itself.
|
|
|
|
GlassBeadGame |
|
Dharma Bum
Group: Contributors
Posts: 7,919
Joined:
From: My name it means nothing. My age it means less. The country I come from is called the Mid-West.
Member No.: 981
|
QUOTE(the fieryangel @ Thu 29th November 2007, 6:27am) Has anyone seen this "remedy"??? QUOTE Remedy suspended
2.1) Any remedy which restricts Giano from the Wikipedia namespace shall be suspended until the conclusion of the ArbCom elections, and will be lifted should Giano be appointed to the Committee. For the moment, this is 4/0/0/0, but....I'm just speechless. If he wins the election, then he gets off? If he doesn't, then he's punished? Do they think at all? How can they not see the implications in this? This is just too much. Okay, that's it! I'm changing my vote! GIANO for ARBCOM!!! This is interesting. It would permit Users to use the ArbCom election as a means of overriding an unfair punishment by ArbCom, even if they don't care a rat's ass if Giano is on ArbCom or not. Of course if it is to have any chance of success the voter must characterize their support as Giano being "A wise and prudent arbitrator" and not indicate their real motives for the vote. Then Mr. Wales will have to decide how he wants to play his hand. This does seem to have great potential to strike a serious blow to ArbCom, WP's dysfunctional social networking community and it's failing God-King. I Vote Giano: I don't give a rat's ass about ArbCom (Shhh...no telling now.)
|
|
|
|
badlydrawnjeff |
|
Writing four featured articles made me a danger to the project.
Group: Contributors
Posts: 272
Joined:
From: Manchester, NH
Member No.: 1,007
|
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Thu 29th November 2007, 7:46am) QUOTE(Somey @ Thu 29th November 2007, 7:22am) Surely just remaining on Wikipedia is penalty enough? (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/unsure.gif) No, it's a privilege to contribute featured articles for Wikipedia. That's why Uninvited Company linked to: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=174534752Being an administrator is more like a burden. Serving on Arbitration Committee is noblesse oblige. Not a privilege at all. No "vested contributors" here. These are the slaves to virtue who make the joys of mainspace possible. Wow, I'm glad I got that benefit of the doubt when I was getting raked over the coals.
|
|
|
|
Fox |
|
New Member
Group: Contributors
Posts: 30
Joined:
Member No.: 3,960
|
Am I wrong in reading this comment that basically what Jimbo Wales, the ArbCom, and clerks like Thatcher131 are really upset about is the fact that Giano has successfully demonstrated that a lone user can render their entire power structure irrelevant by disclosing information that drives the community? QUOTE Giano believes he did the right thing for the right reasons in publishing a private email and then republishing it after Cary removed it. He has also posted logs from the admins IRC channel when he believes they contained discussion that was inappropriate and brought discredit on the people involved in the discussion. Why is it an assumption of bad faith to wonder what Giano will do if he finds something similar in the Arbcom-L archives? [[User talk:Thatcher131|Thatcher131]] 15:51, 29 November 2007 (UTC) It is sadly apparent that certain people are now doing everything in their power to discredit Giano to keep him off of ArbCom. Did you notice that on the same note a motion to sanction Mercury was removed from the workshop as trolling? Protect the cabal indeed. This post has been edited by Fox:
|
|
|
|
Fox |
|
New Member
Group: Contributors
Posts: 30
Joined:
Member No.: 3,960
|
|
|
|
|
Sxeptomaniac |
|
Senior Member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 332
Joined:
From: Fresno, CA
Member No.: 3,542
|
As of now, it looks like they aren't going to put any restrictions on Giano ( Mackeson changed his vote). The only measure regarding him that's passing at this point is a reminder. This post has been edited by Sxeptomaniac:
|
|
|
|
Disillusioned Lackey |
|
Unregistered
|
QUOTE(Fox @ Thu 29th November 2007, 8:14am) I have a sad feeling that Giano getting forced into this as a party was an attempt to discredit him to keep him off of the ArbCom itself.
That's actually not necessary. Even were he voted in, votes dont decide. Who put him up for this? I thought it was "the guy with the funny name, starts with O", but I think it was Fred Bauder. Fred Bauder is being very old ladyish about this case. He's more of the mood to see Giano caned. QUOTE(Fox @ Thu 29th November 2007, 10:30am) It is sadly apparent that certain people are now doing everything in their power to discredit Giano to keep him off of ArbCom. Did you notice that on the same note a motion to sanction Mercury was removed from the workshop as trolling? Protect the cabal indeed.
Well, that was a given when he started being so outspoken about !! (and probably before, as he seems to have raised hackles). And if he has that strong of a personality, he probably cares more about the issue/moment, more than making nice with the powers that be. Which means in the current framework, he'd not fit in. Logical. This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey:
|
|
|
|
Disillusioned Lackey |
|
Unregistered
|
QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 29th November 2007, 6:38pm) If Mr. Wales uses fiat , not popular vote, to select any ArbCom members he will suffer a significant loss of credibility. If we can help to maneuver him into this position, we should.
... because that's stopped him before...
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
| |