Moulton arbitration request Options

[michael]

There's currently a request at WP:RFAR to review Moulton's indefinite block. I'm a bit confuzzled. No arb has yet voted on whether to accept it or not, and I know they're active - the Episodes and characters RFAR just went from evidence fo voting. Will he win a reprieve like Ferrylodge? Or will he be sunk like Iantresman?

[Moulton]

As I understand it, a community ban requires a community-wide discussion and consensus decision.

Contrast that with the power of an Admin to execute a block on their own independent judgment, without necessarily consulting anyone else or arriving at a consensus.

But an Admin can also make such a block "indefinite" (meaning it never expires).

The terms "Community Ban" and "Indefinite Block" tend to be conflated because they amount to the same thing, even though the community isn't asked to weigh in on the case when an Admin executes an indefinite block on their own independent judgment.

The "banned is banned" notion seems overly emphasized, especially when it's not a true community ban, but simply one Admin executing an indefinite block (and in my case for an arbitrary and capricious reason).

Note in my case that KillerChihuahua (who executed the block) posted her reason on the block log...

19:22, 11 September 2007 KillerChihuahua (Talk | contribs) blocked "Moulton (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite ‎ (Disruptive POV OR warrior with no interest in writing an encyclopedia. See Rfc.)

But the tag posted on my User Page was added by a different admin (MastCell), who gave an entirely different reason...

You have been indefinitely blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated abuse of editing privileges.

Inexplicably, that last link (abuse of editing privileges) goes to the Wikipedia page on Vandalism.

The word 'vandalism' doesn't even appear on the RfC that User:Filll and his allied editors in the Wikipedia Project on Intelligent Design filed against me.

So I'm still waiting for the "good reason" that I was booted off the site.

Incidentally, KillerChihuahua posted this note on the RfC Discussion Page that she was going to bypass the WP:CSN (Community Sanction Noticeboard), where proposed Community Bans were normally posted for community-wide discussion...

Actually, on second thought why waste yet more time on WP:CSN? I'm just going to indef and post on ANI. KillerChihuahua?!? 19:21, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

It's also important to note that KillerChihuahua was also a charter member of the Wikipedia Project on Intelligent Design, that being the cabal that brought the RfC against me in the first place.

In other words, the members of the Wikipedia Project on Intelligent design played the role of Plaintiff, Arresting Officer, Clerk of the Court, Prosecutor, Witness, Bailiff, Judge, Jury, and Executioner.

And ArbCom found nothing unusual or out of the ordinary about that.

This post has been edited by Moulton: Fri 11th April 2008, 3:26am

[Proabivouac]

In other words, the members of the Wikipedia Project on Intelligent design played the role of Plaintiff, Arresting Officer, Clerk of the Court, Prosecutor, Witness, Bailiff, Judge, Jury, and Executioner.

And ArbCom found nothing unusual or out of the ordinary about that.

See here…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Irreduci...olation_of_NPOV
…here…
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...AMatthewHoffman
…and here…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...Matthew_Hoffman
…for another example of aggressive overreaching by the members of this Wikiproject, in this case recognized and somewhat rectified by the Arbitration Committee.

This post has been edited by Proabivouac: Fri 11th April 2008, 4:10am