| Revision as of 11:02, 29 January 2022 editAmoeba69th (talk | contribs)189 edits →Alternatives?← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:14, 11 February 2022 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,302,485 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive 6) (botNext edit → | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| {{Hidden bottom}}}}__TOC__{{clear}} | {{Hidden bottom}}}}__TOC__{{clear}} | ||
| <!-- ALL DISCUSSION TO PLEASE GO BELOW THIS LINE, AND THE ABOVE FRONT MATTER BEING LEFT ALONE. --> | <!-- ALL DISCUSSION TO PLEASE GO BELOW THIS LINE, AND THE ABOVE FRONT MATTER BEING LEFT ALONE. --> | ||
| == Wikibreak == | |||
| I assumed that Wikibreak counts as time, but {{ping|Deepfriedokra}} is saying wikibreak is not included, then he reverts his own edit. | |||
| ''Please be aware that the six-month TBAN means six months of active editing. Time on Wikibreak does not count. Cheers, --Deepfriedokra (talk) 07:48, 25 November 2021'' | |||
| https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Echo1Charlie&oldid=1057069900 | |||
| So, if someone stops editing for two months after one month topic ban, his ban is still in effect? --] (]) 13:33, 11 December 2021 (UTC) | |||
| :I do know that this is often taken into account when an appeal is made to the community to end a ban early or to end an indefinite ban. However I am not aware that the timer on timed bans is paused when taking a wikibreak. Honestly I am not 100% sure. I don't see anything in the banning policy, or the arbitration policies, or the wording on the topic ban. But I may be missing something. <small>] <small><sup>Need help? ''']'''</sup></small></small> 13:52, 11 December 2021 (UTC) | |||
| :There's no reason to assume that the timer pauses during a wikibreak (also known as life) and a rule like would pose difficult to enforce in most cases. ] (]) 14:59, 11 December 2021 (UTC) | |||
| :Not sure if my opinion counts, was just intrigued by the topic title on the watchlist. But it feels deeply unfair to "pause" a sanction if the user is away. I had a 6-month topic ban from politics once because I was, well kind of a jerk. But if I had just taken off with zero edits in that time-frame, some people think it would still be in effect upon return? That seems awfully punitive. ] (]) 17:22, 11 December 2021 (UTC) | |||
| ::Never, ever saw that a person could wikibreak a TBAN away and then take up where they left off. In every WP:AN(I) discussion I ever saw, it was said that this was gaming the system and that the person must demonstrate the ability to constructively and actively edit in other areas. I reverted my comment because I was told I was wrong (on IRC as I recall). --<b>] ]</b> 09:14, 12 December 2021 (UTC) | |||
| :::Time-limited bans are not effected by wikibreaks (which is just a formal way of saying 'not editing'). What often happens when people do take the 'Well I just wont edit then' is that when its time to appeal (if its not a hard limit) absolutely multiple editors will go "You just buggered off, are you going to go straight back to doing what you did before?" and often vote oppose lifting the ban, because everyone knows they just socked for the intervening 6 months. #cynic. Essentially admins should remember if they are placing a time-based ban, is that it should be time-before-appeal, not time-before-automatic lifting. The other unstated and oft-forgot thing about time-based bans is that they are rarely there for the benefit of the person banned, they exist to give everyone else a break from them. ] (]) 09:34, 12 December 2021 (UTC) | |||
| :::I think it's much more likely that this gaming-the-system thing is a separate issue. It would be ludicrous to ALWAYS pause ban timers for wikibreaks. If somebody gets a TBAN or a site ban, and then goes for 6 months of nature hikes and reading Ralph Waldo Emerson and reconsiders how they spend their life, and returns to edit productively and actually does, would you really reimpose their TBAN because they didn't have "productive editing" in the meantime? Gaming-the-system just seems like a separate but related issue — ] <sup>(]</sup> <sup>])</sup> 16:46, 12 December 2021 (UTC) | |||
| *Time is time. If it is a 6 month tban, it doesn't matter what they do during those 6 months. It would be too subjective to place limits on them requiring certain kinds of other work. If they wikibreak for 6 months then come back, it is kind of moot as they are likely to get in the same trouble. My perspective has always been that the purpose of the tban isn't to help that person, it is to help that topic by removing that person, so what they do in the meanwhile doesn't matter. The fact that they didn't participate in other areas CAN be taken under consideration if they get dragged to AE again after the tban expires, as their entire editing history comes into play. ] - ] 10:29, 12 December 2021 (UTC) | |||
| *If you're top-banned from something for six-months & so take a six-month wiki-break. When you return, the topic ban will have expired. Either way, during those six months, you didn't go around that specified topic. ] (]) 15:40, 12 December 2021 (UTC) | |||
| *Yes, I do believe you were wrong, young ]. A time-limited t-ban can just be wikibreaked (wikibroken?) away. That's why I'm against time-limited bans, and hardly ever place them or recommend them; they don't tend to be conducive to learning anything, but more to merely waiting out the ban. Might those AN(I) discussions you've seen have been about indefinite t-bans? Because they're very different in that respect. When appealing an indef ban, a user had better have constructive editing in other areas/projects to point to, or the appeal will be rejected: "What have you learned about neutral editing in the meantime? Oh, nothing? Right, appeal declined". ] | ] 16:42, 12 December 2021 (UTC). | |||
| == Query as to how AE should operate – are arguments to be made via edit summaries? == | == Query as to how AE should operate – are arguments to be made via edit summaries? == | ||
Revision as of 05:14, 11 February 2022
 | ShortcutNote: This talk page should only be used for discussion about the way arbitration enforcement operates: how to use the enforcement noticeboard, who can post and why, etc. All discussion about specific enforcement requests should be routed through the main noticeboard or other relevant pages for discussion. Discussion about the committee in general should go to a wider audience at WT:AC or WT:ACN. → Please click here to start a new topic. ← |
 Archives |
| 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 |
|
Note about these archives
In 2008 the committee amalgamated all talk pages of the various arbitration requests subpages, and from then AE-related discussion took place at WT:AC. In 2015 this decision was overturned and AE regained a stand-alone talk page (with the committee ruling that it should have one solely for procedural and meta-discussion, with it not being used to rehash enforcement requests themselves). There are therefore two distinct archives for this page. Archive 3 and onwards are from after the restoration of the talk page. Archive 1 and 2 above are the archives from before the amalgamation. |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Query as to how AE should operate – are arguments to be made via edit summaries?
Newimpartial, probably being aware that they have exceeded the word limit, is now arguing with me via an edit summary. Is this permitted? How should I respond? Sweet6970 (talk) 15:50, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah thats not cool. Having an edit summary as an explanation of your edit, sure. Having an edit summary make an argument with a blank edit??? nableezy ) 16:09, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- Nableezy, it didn't occur to me to reply here, or I would have done so. I wasn't trying to add words under the radar - I have already said what there was to say formally in response to Sweet6790; his reply to me showed that we are continuing to talk past each other, and my clarification was essentially just for
hisher benefit and mine. I wouldn't expect admin to read or take into account a dummy comment I make in an edit summary, though of course it is available for everyone to see and consider if they wish. I wish I had thought of posting here, instead, since it is clearly a better option. Newimpartial (talk) 16:16, 16 December 2021 (UTC)- I dont think adding replies here help either. If youre over the word limit and the admins will not extend it further you basically have one option. Stop talking, since removing old things that have been replied to already is a no-no as well. If you want to keep arguing the point, ask for an extension of the limit. nableezy - 16:39, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- to Newimpartial: I’m not bothered because, after all, I’m a woman, so I’m used to the assumption that I am man, but I have declared on my User page that I am a woman, and I asked the computer to call me ‘she’ . If you ever feel inclined to get righteous about someone being misgendered, remember that you’ve done it to me. Sweet6970 (talk) 16:47, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- This really is not the page to continue arguing the point. Your initial query was fair, just continuing the same argument is not. nableezy - 16:57, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- Sweet6970 I really am sorry, and have corrected, above. I don't recall any previous instances where I didn't catch mistaken pronouns on WP before anyone else did, but I have blown it this time. I hope my unintentional error didn't give rise to hurt the way deliberate misgendering tends to do, and I will try harder to catch my mental gaffes in future (I remember making one at Talk:Elliot Page that gave me nightmares, though I'm reasonably sure Elliot never saw it). Newimpartial (talk) 17:15, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- Also, re: this edit, I did not see it until subsequent chatter and was therefore unaware of the misgendering it contained, during the above exchange.
- However, I can't really see how it could have been unintentional, given her previous comment six weeks ago, that "mansplaining" is a condescending entitlement of which the meaning isn't changed because those who do it wrap themselves with a multi-colored gender flag, which seems to recognise that my gender identity isn't reflected in male pronouns, given the context of that discussion. Newimpartial (talk) 18:29, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- to Newimpartial: I’m not bothered because, after all, I’m a woman, so I’m used to the assumption that I am man, but I have declared on my User page that I am a woman, and I asked the computer to call me ‘she’ . If you ever feel inclined to get righteous about someone being misgendered, remember that you’ve done it to me. Sweet6970 (talk) 16:47, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- I dont think adding replies here help either. If youre over the word limit and the admins will not extend it further you basically have one option. Stop talking, since removing old things that have been replied to already is a no-no as well. If you want to keep arguing the point, ask for an extension of the limit. nableezy - 16:39, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- Nableezy, it didn't occur to me to reply here, or I would have done so. I wasn't trying to add words under the radar - I have already said what there was to say formally in response to Sweet6790; his reply to me showed that we are continuing to talk past each other, and my clarification was essentially just for
- Speaking from an admin point of view, I don't look at the edit summaries, to be honest, just the words in the report. I will say that making null edits just to "try" to bypass the word limit is not acceptable behavior, regardless of how ineffective it is. I wouldn't recommend the practice, as a pattern of it might be seen as disruptive by any admin passing by. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 19:10, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
Allegations of proxying meatpuppetry
Hello,
I believe that someone who was tbanned by arbcom is currently engaged in WP:PROXYING (I have lots of evidence but see this smoking gun). What is the most appropriate place to make such allegations, here or at WP:SPI? The nature of the evidence is very SPI-ish, meaning comparing behavior, writing style etc. But at the same time, this is not sockpuppetry and checkuser will obviously not be of use here.
Thanks and sorry if this is the wrong place to ask this question.VR talk 19:41, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- Here (on the main page, not on the talk page) or WP:ANI, definitely not WP:SPI--Ymblanter (talk) 19:44, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Proposed rescinding of several DS regimes
Page watchers may be interested in Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Motions#Discretionary sanctions topic area changes. Izno (talk) 18:19, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
Alternatives?
I am dealing with a situation where an area is under AE, a user is not hearing me, but I'd still prefer to avoid bringing it to this board if at all possible. I'm wondering what alternatives are available. I don't think I can go to any particular admin per WP:CANVAS. I am trying to avoid going overboard per WP:DONTBITE. Is there a way to ask for gentler admin attention than what this board typically provides? Adoring nanny (talk) 15:53, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
- A couple thoughts @Adoring nanny without having done background research. Some areas have an admin who regularly does work in it. Asking for their thoughts is pretty typical and is generally not considered an issue. Other forms of dispute resolution, like WP:3PO may also be available to you. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:56, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
im on the same situation @adoring nanny, but instead is a user that caused to build a fake consensus with hirelings and calling friends out based on fake accusations to me. Amoeba69th (talk) 11:02, 29 January 2022 (UTC)