CaptainEek (talk | contribs) →Comments by George Ho: Replying to George Ho (using reply-link) |
CaptainEek (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
Does the IBAN proposal mean that Flyer22 and her bro Halo Jerk1 can't interact with each other on-wiki anymore? If not, then the IBAN proposal needs a rewrite to Flyer22 and Halo Jerk1 not interacting with WanderingWanda, and Wanda not interacting with Flyer22 and Halo Jerk1. --[[User:George Ho|George Ho]] ([[User talk:George Ho|talk]]) 06:14, 21 January 2021 (UTC) |
Does the IBAN proposal mean that Flyer22 and her bro Halo Jerk1 can't interact with each other on-wiki anymore? If not, then the IBAN proposal needs a rewrite to Flyer22 and Halo Jerk1 not interacting with WanderingWanda, and Wanda not interacting with Flyer22 and Halo Jerk1. --[[User:George Ho|George Ho]] ([[User talk:George Ho|talk]]) 06:14, 21 January 2021 (UTC) |
||
:Agreed. The current wording is a three-way mutual interaction ban, and doesn't seem to address the actual issues here (there is no conflict to resolve/prevent between Flyer and Halo). Then again, ArbCom's draft so far is entirely avoiding the {{em|real}} issue underlying this case, but as I've said several times, it will take a much broader RfArb with many more parties to deal with that. It might even take a later ArbCom; it became clear by about Jan. 10 that the current body was going to permit a particular faction to run roughshod over these proceedings with whatever character-assassination behavior they wanted, and we're consequently going to see them emboldened. Maybe AE will have the spine to address it when it likely happens again, but my expectations are low. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''']] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] 😼 </span> 06:52, 21 January 2021 (UTC) |
:Agreed. The current wording is a three-way mutual interaction ban, and doesn't seem to address the actual issues here (there is no conflict to resolve/prevent between Flyer and Halo). Then again, ArbCom's draft so far is entirely avoiding the {{em|real}} issue underlying this case, but as I've said several times, it will take a much broader RfArb with many more parties to deal with that. It might even take a later ArbCom; it became clear by about Jan. 10 that the current body was going to permit a particular faction to run roughshod over these proceedings with whatever character-assassination behavior they wanted, and we're consequently going to see them emboldened. Maybe AE will have the spine to address it when it likely happens again, but my expectations are low. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''']] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] 😼 </span> 06:52, 21 January 2021 (UTC) |
||
::The three way mutual IBAN is intended to prevent all parties from interacting with all parties. That means Halo Jerk and Flyer cannot interact with each other. We could have written this as several separate two way IBans, but that would have been a lot of text that meant exactly the same thing as a three way IBan. [[User:CaptainEek|<span style="color:#6a1f7f">'''CaptainEek'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:CaptainEek|<span style="font-size:82%"><span style="color:#a479e5">''Edits Ho Cap'n!''</span></span>]]</sup>[[Special:Contributions/CaptainEek|⚓]] 07:13, 21 January 2021 (UTC) |
::The three way mutual IBAN is intended to prevent all parties from interacting with all parties. That means Halo Jerk and Flyer cannot interact with each other, Wanda and flyer can't interact, halo and wanda can't interact, and all possible permutations. We could have written this as several separate two way IBans, but that would have been a lot of text that meant exactly the same thing as a three way IBan. [[User:CaptainEek|<span style="color:#6a1f7f">'''CaptainEek'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:CaptainEek|<span style="font-size:82%"><span style="color:#a479e5">''Edits Ho Cap'n!''</span></span>]]</sup>[[Special:Contributions/CaptainEek|⚓]] 07:13, 21 January 2021 (UTC) |
Revision as of 07:18, 21 January 2021
Case clerk: TBD Drafting arbitrator: TBD
Wikipedia Arbitration |
---|
![]() |
|
Track related changes |
Behaviour on this page: Arbitration case pages exist to assist the Arbitration Committee in arriving at a fair, well-informed decision. You are required to act with appropriate decorum during this case. While grievances must often be aired during a case, you are expected to air them without being rude or hostile, and to respond calmly to allegations against you. Accusations of misbehaviour posted in this case must be proven with clear evidence (and otherwise not made at all). Editors who conduct themselves inappropriately during a case may be sanctioned by an arbitrator, clerk, or functionary, without further warning, by being banned from further participation in the case, or being blocked altogether. Personal attacks against other users, including arbitrators or the clerks, will be met with sanctions. Behavior during a case may also be considered by the committee in arriving at a final decision.
Comments by Kolya Butternut
As of this writing I see that all of the proposed findings of fact are limited to gender-related areas, and the proposed findings of fact of Flyer22's behavior towards other editors are limited to attacks on editors as "activists", not "impartial", and accusations of "canvassing".[1]
During the evidence gathering phase editors had asked for case scope clarification, and were informed that while "focused on these two parties" the case is "not limited to a single topic area". Regardless of the outcome, I would like to see !voting on proposed findings of fact regarding Flyer22's behavior towards other editors beyond these three particular kinds of attacks. Kolya Butternut (talk) 02:19, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
- Barkeep49, you commented: "
For years Flyer worked hard to uphold Wikipedian values.... However, somewhere along the way I think all this good work exhausted her good faith
".[2] Please note the evidence of bad faith from 2009 and 2015 which is consistent with more recent behavior. Kolya Butternut (talk) 02:39, 21 January 2021 (UTC)- We're all allowed bad moments and in a career as prolific as Flyer's there are bound to be some. I stand by my comment based on the totality of the evidence presented. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:43, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
- Please vote on the prolific violations of WP:ESDONTS.[3] Kolya Butternut (talk) 03:33, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
- Please vote on a findings of fact regarding Flyer22's Battleground conduct.[4]
- Note that the scope of WanderingWanda's initial statement covers battleground conduct not limited to gender topic areas: "
she has a history of inappropriate WP:BATTLEGROUND behavior, especially in discussions about gender-related controversies.
"[5] Kolya Butternut (talk) 05:53, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
- Note that the scope of WanderingWanda's initial statement covers battleground conduct not limited to gender topic areas: "
Comments by George Ho
Does the IBAN proposal mean that Flyer22 and her bro Halo Jerk1 can't interact with each other on-wiki anymore? If not, then the IBAN proposal needs a rewrite to Flyer22 and Halo Jerk1 not interacting with WanderingWanda, and Wanda not interacting with Flyer22 and Halo Jerk1. --George Ho (talk) 06:14, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
- Agreed. The current wording is a three-way mutual interaction ban, and doesn't seem to address the actual issues here (there is no conflict to resolve/prevent between Flyer and Halo). Then again, ArbCom's draft so far is entirely avoiding the real issue underlying this case, but as I've said several times, it will take a much broader RfArb with many more parties to deal with that. It might even take a later ArbCom; it became clear by about Jan. 10 that the current body was going to permit a particular faction to run roughshod over these proceedings with whatever character-assassination behavior they wanted, and we're consequently going to see them emboldened. Maybe AE will have the spine to address it when it likely happens again, but my expectations are low. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 06:52, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
- The three way mutual IBAN is intended to prevent all parties from interacting with all parties. That means Halo Jerk and Flyer cannot interact with each other, Wanda and flyer can't interact, halo and wanda can't interact, and all possible permutations. We could have written this as several separate two way IBans, but that would have been a lot of text that meant exactly the same thing as a three way IBan. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 07:13, 21 January 2021 (UTC)