ARBCOM Badsites, This is what they're saying about us ... Options Rating

[the fieryangel]

JzG is still upset about being called sexist (maybe you'll shut your mouth the next time, Guy?), but they also have quite a lot to about WR : Here's our entry!

So, whatcha think???

[The Joy]

Wait a minute... didn't FloNight and SlimVirgin leave in 2005 after Blu Aardvark and Selina were briefly restated to WP by Linuxbeak? Hasn't FloNight encountered off-wiki harassment by ED?

What I'm getting at is: Does FloNight have a conflict of interest here and should have recused?

[Daniel Brandt]

Wait a minute... didn't FloNight and SlimVirgin leave in 2005 after Blu Aardvark and Selina were briefly restated to WP by Linuxbeak? Hasn't FloNight encountered off-wiki harassment by ED?

What I'm getting at is: Does FloNight have a conflict of interest here and should have recused?

Your mean stuff like this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=55684591
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=55686614
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=55851568
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=56052063
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=56054904
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=56158463

FloNight sang a different song before she got elected:

Question from Thesmothete 18:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee has guidelines for who takes part in deciding cases. I plan to follow those guidelines which call for self assessment of conflicts of interest and also listening to any concerns expressed by others. Also, I will recuse myself from any case where I have taken significant action as an administrator. With the increase in number of arbitrators after this election, I see no reason for any arbitrator to hear a case where minor conflicts of interest exist. If over time the situation changes and there is a shortge of arbitrators, then I will reevaluate the situation.

I would like to point out that no significant issues about conflict of interest were ever raised by outside interests since I have been in my position as Arbitration Committee Clerk. Likely this is because I have recused myself ahead of parties requests and notified them of it on their talk pages. Since this has been successful, I plan to continue to follow this way of handling these situations. FloNight 12:32, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, FloNight should recuse herself.

And Fred should wait until all the evidence is in before he goes off half-cocked. Instead, the evidence process is broken. They deleted evidence from me that was important because it powerfully demonstrated that a distinction between an "attack page" and an "attack site" is crucial when considering this issue. Fred should have overruled Durova's revert of my evidence. Heck, he should have acknowledged my complaint last April after Newyorkbrad sent it to the ArbCom mailing list. But no ArbCom clerks are watching the evidence page. (Newyorkbrad recused himself early on because he was involved in the MONGO wording, if I recall correctly.)

Instead, Fred says he doesn't believe in looking at the relevant evidence:

Arbitration proceedings exempted

2) No prohibition on referencing external material imposed by this decision shall be applied to evidence submitted as part of an open request for arbitration.

Support:
1. Kirill 14:21, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:
1. Opens the door to systemic trolling in the case of the worst sites. Fred Bauder 21:06, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Abstain:

This ArbCom proceeding will probably have to be appealed to the Board of Trustees. I don't think Jimbo will ride in on a white horse and straighten it out. I don't think Jimbo has a white horse these days.

If things continue on this case they way they have been, this ArbCom proceeding will mark the day that ArbCom screwed up Big Time. It's turning into a huge joke already.

Oh well, more traffic for Wikipedia Review and Wikipedia-Watch. I'm in an excellent position to judge just how much traffic comes from a hot link on Wikipedia, because I monitor log referrals on my servers, and all my sites were on the spam blacklist for more than six months. The power-drunk admins at Wikipedia think they're playing God by denying links. They're hallucinating. A dozen visitors per day are at issue, from what I've seen for any of my sites. That's peanuts.

The fun of watching this ArbCom case is that they're going to shoot Wikipedia in the foot with it by making a mockery of ArbCom's procedures, at the same time that they inadvertently enhance the viability of Wikipedia Review and Wikipedia-Watch by enforcing BADSITES.