Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 11:15, 1 July 2019

Jimbo welcomes your comments and updates – he has an open door policy. He holds the founder's seat on the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees. The current trustees occupying "community-selected" seats are Doc James, Pundit and Raystorm. The Wikimedia Foundation's Lead Manager of Trust and Safety is Jan Eissfeldt.

Sometimes this page is semi-protected and you will not be able to leave a message here unless you are a registered editor. In that case, you can leave a message here

This is Jimbo Wales's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: Index, Index, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252Auto-archiving period: 2 days

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

Village pumps

policy

tech

proposals

idea lab

WMF

misc

• Refining the administrator elections process
• Blocks for promotional activity outside of mainspace

• view
• edit
• history
• watch
• archive
• talk
• purge

Everything I did...

This weekend I was out on Lake Pepin in my sailboat. Alone. I was thinking of Misplaced Pages.

I thought of everything I did to lobby for the creation of the arbitration committee, to make it successful, to strike the balance between transparancy and effectiveness. I thought of the work I did as an early OTRS volunteer to ensure that it was the community and not the paid staff dealing with routine requests. I thought of the community backlash I endured from dealing with an administrator conduct matter where I could not defend myself without disclosing confidential information. I thought of all the times I turned the other cheek, and of all the civility discussions with Anthere, and the efforts to set limits, and lead by example, and to be the light for others to follow. I thought, in short, of everything I did to further the goals of a self-governing community.

And I thought of how we are now on the cusp of the moment where that no longer matters.

Peace

UninvitedCompany 19:10, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Very thoughtful of you indeed. However, I have been absent for a while, so what “cusp” is it exactly which is almost upon us? Giano (talk) 19:33, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Aah well, that is the question. Difficult to speculate fully as my crystal ball has gone very cloudy... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:02, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

It’s clearly very complex, rather like the people, in the section below, who appear to be supporting a statement which doesn’t exist. I’ve always said The WMF is staffed by very odd people - you have to pay well to get the best people and I expect they don’t. If you need my advice Jimbo, I am back now. Giano (talk) 08:02, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Support

+1 The Rambling Man (talk) 19:27, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

+1 Jehochman 19:32, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

+1 –Davey2010 19:34, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

+1 Hell in a Bucket (talk) 22:58, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

+1 yes, I have been thinking similar thoughts to this Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:01, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

+1 Carrite (talk) 06:15, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

• What exactly are you referring to? And what's up with this weird header? Masum Reza 23:12, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

• It is an expression of support for the statement above. - SchroCat (talk) 23:37, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Do you mean Uninvited Company’s statement or another one? Giano (talk) 10:01, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes, Giano, this one by Uninvited Company. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 14:17, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

+1 — Ched :  ?  — 15:16, 25 June 2019 (UTC) (to clarify: I agree that it no longer matters what efforts we make - the site will become what the WMF says it will become.)

• No, it will not! There were far worse battles with the hidden powers and creatures of the night back in the early 2000s. We just have a new generation now, who need to learn the same lessons. I for one haven’t forgotten how just speaking German made you an enemy of the office. Soldier on and all will be well. Giano (talk) 17:56, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

• I'm certainly interested in the how. Even if I have to figure it out on my own, I'm fine with that as long as I have a link to start following. From my perspective, the new generation appear to have the servers in their (or their parents basement) these days and are capable of writing the closing chapters in the manner that they so choose. Still - I'm far from all-knowing, so I'm certainly willing to do a bit of reading ... or follow a bit of direction coming from a well reasoned source. That being said - it's great to see you still about Giano - I hope all is well in real life with you and yours. — Ched :  ?  — 20:10, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
• Speaking as a "creature of the night" - so far as Jimbo is concerned anyway - I think that Giano is quite right. It's very easy to roll over, but it's not very seemly, and in the end achieves nothing except having to roll over again and again in the future. Eric Corbett 20:16, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
• @Giano: those battles in the early 2000s were way before WMF became a multimillion dollar enterprise, so the dynamics are different now and yes, the site will indeed become what the WMF makes it. 173.84.211.79 (talk) 06:07, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

+1 Benjamin (talk) 01:29, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

+1 Hello UC! How I envy time on that fine lake. And hello Cas and all. A comprehensive + thoughtful self-governing community (replicable in as many languages and facets as can be mustered) is the most interesting and important part of the projects. Let us make it also the most lasting. – SJ + 23:34, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Katherine Maher’s Shitty Tweet

1. She tweets
2. She denies targeting @Bernstein
3. But he did retweet exactly three times.

I have no words. Jehochman 10:39, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

But you're doing it all wrong. Instead of just starting your own section to talk about what people are already talking about in the section directly above, what you're supposed to do is:

1. Imply, coyly, that you have secret knowledge of an offsite statement by a senior member of WMF staff that will shock us.
2. Insist that you can't possibly tell us any more so as not to embarrass those involved.
3. Ask the arbitration committee to investigate this thing you can't tell them about.
4. Dither.
5. Reveal, with a flourish, that the secret information you had was...wait for it...what everybody else had already been talking about for days.
6. Ermm...
7. Profit.

I hope that helps. -- Begoon 10:58, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Jimmy, if the goal of WMF was to improve civility on Misplaced Pages, it’s not working. Begoon, I am not responsible for the unrealistic expectations of others and I have a life outside Misplaced Pages. Jehochman 11:05, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Heavens, was I uncivil? If so, I humbly apologise. If I wasn't, and you just thought I was, then I apologise for that too. Sorry. -- Begoon 11:11, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

That’s quite alright good person. I won’t be ratting on you to the WMF and their feared T&S secret police. Jehochman 11:15, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

The Bernstein Buzz Feed article has several words concerning the community, that the Misplaced Pages editor community at its core appears to be group of nasty power hungry administrators and power users. If so, the thing to do is praise the WMFban because it promotes leveling Users. And if you don't agree that the community is dominated by a nasty few, then you might think it's a lousy think piece Alanscottwalker (talk) 11:03, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

What do you call the power hungry people who’ve turned T&S into the secret police and use them to oppress adversaries? Jehochman 11:19, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

According to the article, promoters of leveling Users, so the English Misplaced Pages community is not dominated by a network of nasty power hungry administrators and power users. Just look at one illustration of nastiness by the community covered in the article, abusing a woman just because they suspect her for getting in the way of what they want. Thus, a person in the article has to admit that's why the WMFOffice exists. Alanscottwalker (talk) 11:41, 28 June 2019 (UTC) Alanscottwalker (talk) 11:32, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

I suppose I should add, because facts are stubborn things, 1) the admin in issue was warned about their conduct, when we warn people, we regularly insist the person is 'on thin ice'; and 2) English Arbcom was informed about the warning and that an action was forthcoming, it appears the English Arbcom did not grok what that meant but they still had prior information. Alanscottwalker (talk) 12:22, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Policy was changed in secret, without notifying the community. Total disrespect. On the flip side, yet Fram was having behavioral issues. What’s crazy is that WMF could have just explained it. All the evidence they need to make a case is there in public view. They don’t need to resort to any private evidence. Jehochman 12:25, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Well, no. The policy was changed in public, you can't say the evidence is public but the policy change is not. (And, side note, the change was not what would be called substantive, ie. 'what can't be done by users', it's what would be called ancillary process, what are the varying the degrees of remedy.) Nor do you have a basis to insist that the evidence is public, among other things statements are often taken -- when statements are in private, they are not public. Alanscottwalker (talk) 12:31, 28 June 2019 (UTC) (e/c parenthetical added, no change in meaning Alanscottwalker (talk) 12:42, 28 June 2019 (UTC))

Perhaps they think it adds to their gravitas or credibility, and that people will take them more seriously if they pretend to have secret information which is actually common knowledge? Of course, that would be a mistake in the long run, and probably make them look rather foolish, but I guess anything's possible. -- Begoon 12:36, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Adding, what's 'crazy', down right unethical and cruel, is expecting the WMF to dangle persons out there to be abused by the community (and we have seen in Buzzfeed reporting, the community abuse someone when all they have is suspicion). Alanscottwalker (talk) 12:53, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

That's why any good system of justice provides the accused basic rights: knowing the charges, ability to refute the evidence, opportunity to file an appeal. Jehochman 14:35, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

First of all, it's overwrought to call upon "justice" when what the community regularly tells people is this is a website not a justice center -- it is not about justice, it is about writing an encyclopedia on a website in cooperation with others. And second of all, it seems like a lie, the community that abuses upon mere suspicion is not interested in, nor about "justice". Finally, how many times do users here say 'oh, I don't know what I did wrong!', and the response 'yes, you do, and if you don't, you're just too incompetent' -- then 'it's not fair!' and the response is 'life's not fair.' People survive and thrive not being here for a bit, and there is still a very big world out there to live in if you are not here for a bit. Alanscottwalker (talk) 14:52, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

I feel like every organization everywhere should be concerned about justice and try to treat its employees and volunteers justly. Many do not. We should. Jehochman 16:50, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

And many feel there should be world peace, etc, etc. but we are here to write an online encyclopedia with others to give away, and when we ban someone it's not because we have perfect justice nor perfect process, it's because despite our human frailties and human lack of knowledge, we think it on balance best to separate for a time. Now, perhaps some people do think the employees of the WMF are 'monsters', or other Godwin like things, but that does not write a single article and is almost certainly untrue. Alanscottwalker (talk) 17:08, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Alanscottwalker, Justice, justice, you shall pursue. It's pretty fundamental to a functioning community/society. Without justice, any attempt at a coherent community collapses. ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 23:02, 28 June 2019 (UTC

No. Mercy is what matters. -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 23:18, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

• For the record, Katherine Maher has now admitted that she was talking about the Buzzfeed article. ‑ Iridescent 16:57, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

  Whoa, so caught out blatantly lying when she tried to make it look like she wasn't. Way to go, Trump! Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:40, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Is that really admitting that? I'm not sure. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:35, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

• I think so. In the tweet where she said it was not a directed comment , an assumption of good faith could be made (if at a stretch) that she was not referring to the BF article. However, in her subsequent tweet she ties it altogether . It's blatantly apparent her original tweet was aimed directly at the BF article. One could make the case that she was speaking in the abstract, and not specifically about BF, but this is a serious stretch as well. This would not stand up to scrutiny. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:46, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Per her statement at User_talk:Katherine_(WMF)#Responding_to_some_questions_and_concerns it doesn't seem so, but it is a little vague. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:34, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

• Using a healthy dose of WP:AGF, we can take it at face value that Maher really was not intending on commenting on the BF article. For the sake of the argument, let's go with that. With that as a given, it doesn't matter; the effect Maher generated is the same whether she was commenting directly on the BF article or not. The fallout is the same. Still going with the AGF, her attempts at explaining it are making people speak such terms as "obfuscate". I.e., it's making it worse. It was a distinctly bad decision for her to comment in the way she did, and her subsequent actions to try to correct that error have only served to make it worse. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:51, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

The staggering lack of leadership from the WMF

Hi Jimmy. In my 13 years contributing to Misplaced Pages, I have not been compelled to reach out to you directly, until now.

The crisis that has beset this project is not going away, and time will not heal all wounds. At every touch point, the WMF has failed to get in front of this in any meaningful way that would lead to restoring the confidence and trust of the volunteers who build and maintain this fifth most popular website. It truly puzzles me that, more two weeks after the Fram ban, the board of trustees has still not managed the finite task of simply responding to the concerns of several hundred devoted volunteer editors. There has not been so much as a statement of solidarity, or even a plausible indication of exactly why it's taking so long to formulate a response.

I'm taken aback by the utterly dismissive attitude of Jan Eissfeldt, Lead Manager of Trust & Safety, and the crass public comments of the executive director Katherine Maher that can only be interpreted as disdain and disregard for the members of this project. This culmination of her thoughts on the matter after all this time? "When you have to retweet your shitty pseudo-thinkpiece three times because no one cares."

No one cares? The author of the BuzzFeed article cares. I care. I hope the board cares. I know hundreds of editors care.

Someone needs to light a fire under the board of trustees, before the fire here gets completely out of control. You are in a position to do that and your legacy is at stake. Good luck and kind regards - - MrX 🖋 11:32, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

"staggering lack of leadership from the WMF" is the best way to describe this. I posted in a section up above that CEO's normally respond very quickly to potential brand tarnishing incidents, at the very least to reassure customers (or in this case the volunteer editor community who built the thing that everybody donates money to) that the leadership is aware of what's going on and working on solutions. It's quite surprising to see the CEO of the WMF take to twitter to stoke tensions and say she didn't ever respond because "very few folks have asked me directly." This is not the transparent, inspiring leadership behavior that I would expect. Mr Ernie (talk) 12:57, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

• I concur with the "staggering lack of leadership" assessment of the WMF. In particular, I call out Maher on this. It is her job to get out in front of this, as MrX notes. The brand is being tarnished, and rather dramatically so. Maher's response on this is minimal at best, and apparently based solely on Twitter, where she has made more tweets in the last 24 hours than she has EVER made on en.wikipedia, and 6 times as many as she's made in the last year on meta.wikimedia.org. Maher's had three years to get the house in order, and this is the best that can be mustered? --Hammersoft (talk) 17:19, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
• Agree. If you are going to try out a new process, pick an easy test case, one that won't generate huge controversy so that you can discover bugs and work them out before tackling harder cases. Starting something new by banning a 100,000+ contribution administrator was not bright. Having no pre-prepared response was stupid. Dithering while the wiki burned was even worse. Jehochman 17:22, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
• Eh, more and more it seems like it was the right thing to do just executed poorly. PackMecEng (talk) 18:10, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
• How many more you gonna lose Jim? How many more admins is acceptable. How many more editors? Say something. 2001:4898:80E8:7:D292:1747:E610:2C3F (talk) 20:09, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
• I've had User:Amalthea (bot)/userhighlighter.js/sysop.js on my watchlist for several months, and as a Wikipedian for 13 years it's been heartbreaking for me to see the number of resignations in the past couple of weeks. I really don't want to follow the same way (see statement on my user page), but at the same time if nothing is done soon I feel I'll have to, just to get away from the miserable and distressing atmosphere that pervades Misplaced Pages at present. — O Still Small Voice of Clam 22:44, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

  Your statement reflects what a great many of us feel about this dark time.- MrX 🖋 22:56, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

• Jimbo. Floq resigned. That may not mean much to you, but it means a hell of a lot to me. It would be nice if you would start saying things, especially helpful things. Drmies (talk) 23:30, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
  • And not on Twitter. --Rschen7754 00:45, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
  • It was very thoughtful of him to return the tools given the drama it caused when he requested them back. PackMecEng (talk) 01:20, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
    • PackMecEng, I find it difficult to parse your words. I don't even know if Floq actually requested them back, or if they were offered back because the process was out of process. What I do suspect in your tone is a complete lack of good faith, and I am wondering if you aren't simply blaming the victim. That victim, BTW, isn't Floquenbeam: it's the community. If indeed you just came by to drop some snark, I'd like to ask you to just stay away next time. Drmies (talk) 14:00, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

I don't think it's snark Drmies. Floquenbeam did request the tools back, explicitly to see if the WMF would make good on their threat of further sanctions.1 Mr rnddude (talk) 14:04, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Mr rnddude, thanks for clearing that up. But I just do not see how the recent drama is to be blamed on Floq, and if this editor indeed thought it was so thoughtful of Floq, they could have sent him a postcard, or left a nice note or a barnstar on his talk page, instead of leaving the accusation of causing drama on the best-known user talk page on Misplaced Pages. Drmies (talk) 14:17, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

@Drmies: Mr rnddude is of course correct. Floq requested his admin bit back after he said he would not. Since you did not seem to follow the situation here is a brief rundown. Floq lost his admin rights here after misuse of his tools to modify an office action. Then he requested his tools back here. Finally he requested his bit removed here. Now as to the drama, you don't think what he did to lose the bit in the first place caused drama? I don't care if you think it was right or wrong but it is hard to deny is caused drama. Second let me just offer this advice, do not comment on a situation if you do not know the situation. It certainly seems a lot of the heat from this whole situation is from not knowing what actually happened and why. PackMecEng (talk) 14:43, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

I know a bit more than you think I know. SUUUUUURE Floq created drama--whose impact was negligible compared to the drama caused by the WMF. The thing that he did to lose his bit was widely supported by the community, which kind of makes it the right thing. So what you're doing here is just a bit of gravedancing. Floq was a great administrator and widely respected, he did the right thing, and here you are. And let's recapitulate: Mr rndude's correction does not deny or even address my claim that you just came here to snark around. If you respected Floq's decision you could have done so in an honest way: you're just here to piss on him. Drmies (talk) 14:49, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Why change your story now? PackMecEng (talk) 15:02, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

I don't think so. The WMF created drama when they banned an editor in good standing without credible justification, due process, and transparency. Everything that followed were attempts by other editors in good standing to ameliorate the situation. PackMecEng, I know you like to take the contrarian viewpoint, but your comments here seem especially shallow.- MrX 🖋 14:58, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Absolutely WMF caused a lot if not more drama, so what? The rest is, from both of you, is just a different point of view. It is good sometimes to consider a contrary view to see if you are actually on the right track. PackMecEng (talk) 15:02, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Drmies and I created the rest of the drama? How can anyone take you seriously when you say things like that?- MrX 🖋 15:52, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

@MrX: When I said The rest is, from both of you, is just a different point of view. was referring to the rest of your comment. Not that you two were the rest of the drama. I have no idea how you could take it that way... PackMecEng (talk) 15:58, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Jimbo, I'm in between coffee and dishes, and am only leaving this note to show that it is perfectly possible to take a few minutes to leave a note on your talk page--and maybe answer a question or two. Drmies (talk) 14:02, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Here's a semi-serious suggestion. Get the Communications people on the horn to John Oliver & any other (potentially) friendly former Comedy Central folks and lead the story... I think you've got some prog-think contractors with the connections to get this buried in laughter rather than tears, no? Poking around in the hive unprotected you get stung, but if you give your team the appropriate gear, apparently you can fill honeypots. (anyone want to find a happy ending for a rousing remake of "We all lived in a stinky submarine"?) 🌿 SashiRolls 15:33, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Another veteran administrator packs it in because of the WMF power grab

Words worth reading:

"Anyway, I've resigned my adminship. I acknowledge I'm doing it under a cloud, so regardless of the result of the ArbCom case, I will need to go thru an RFA to get it back. I cannot imagine going thru that again, so this is for keeps. I'll really miss it; it's mostly been fun, and I hope somewhat useful, and a bigger share of how I've spent my free time than is healthy. But I find it increasingly humiliating to participate in something when the higher powers in the organization have such contempt for me and my peers (and my betters, the people who actually write articles). It is irrefutable that the WMF CEO thinks I am a free, easily replaceable work unit, a cog in the machine that allows her to travel the world. Those who don't drink the Koolaid are to be mocked. It is irrefutable that the WMF thinks of itself as the Master, and local communities as the Servants. Complain, and they will find a way to remove you under false pretexts. It is 99% irrefutable that regardless of Doc James' good will (I'm sorry for not waiting longer, Doc, I know this situation is painful for you), nothing is going to come of this; the WMF's plan is, and always has been, to simply wait it out.

"I am no longer in any sense a part of the power structure of this site." --Floquenbeam

LINK

How many administrators and bureaucrats does this make, is anybody counting? Of course, WMF probably thinks En-WP really has 1,200 administrators, whereas the actual core who does the work is probably more like 200... Carrite (talk) 02:37, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Someone is counting: Misplaced Pages:Community_response_to_the_Wikimedia_Foundation's_ban_of_Fram/Summary#Resignations Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:57, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Geezus...it's up to 21 atm. Shearonink (talk) 14:41, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Fram controversy

See https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Fram_controversy QuackGuru (talk) 03:09, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

See https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2019-06-30/Special_report Did Fram harass other editors? QuackGuru (talk) 20:10, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Volunteers are beginning to turn anti-vandalism bots off in protest

Jimbo, bots do a huge amount of work to keep the encyclopedia usable, and if this sort of thing continues, it will be terrible. I've experienced harassment in the form of WP:TAGTEAMs motivated by politics, gender, and both. What makes the Fram situation so bad is that there are so many outright terrible abusers who have been ignored in favor of a prominent critic of Foundation missteps in the past, which looks terrible. I've decided to stop editing until this is resolved in a way that shows the Foundation is more interested in addressing the obvious out-in-the-open abuse instead of vindictive retribution towards your critics. EllenCT (talk) 06:15, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

For me, what is more important is that the foundation works with the community - if they think change is needed, send in ambassadors that work on the Wiki, with established community processes (and, where needed, with the community to establish new processes). Using the technical ability to lock-out users or lock-in pages is doing nothing to solve what are essentially social problems. Even a benevolent dictator (assuming good faith) is still a dictator - and more to the point, despite trying to do well, does not usually have the knowledge and understanding necessary for good decisions. I was honestly struck by the ignorance about the current situation displayed by the ED in her tweets. It would probably be a good idea if every WMF employee tasked with more than menial work would spend an hour or so of their daily time on Misplaced Pages, just to avoid losing contact with the community. And maybe when hiring deciders, serious experience on Misplaced Pages should be in the skill profile. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 07:37, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

A sad note

For all that there is a genuine aspiration to keep private information about the Fram ban private. It clearly hasn't been a stellar success. It just moments ago came to my notice that one of the persons at least tangentially involved with this affair (I won't repeat their username but you are free to guess) as one of Frams victims has vanished their username. I suppose it is the Streisand effect. -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. (talk) 14:34, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

If their goal was to keep this information private, they failed spectacularly. Every banned troll knew exactly who she was within a few days. WMF should not promise confidentiality. The identities of harassment targets can usually be inferred. Their secrecy serves no purpose and undermines trust. It is dangerous to allow the police to operate in secret. Jehochman 15:06, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

The identity of that specific person was not, I don't think, the secret that was being protected - especially seeing as their identity from those earlier interactions was already widely known. The secret is the identity/ies of the person/people who made the new complaints based on something Fram has done recently. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:14, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Aye. And she wasn't exactly a saint, either. Fram wasn't the only one who'd raised questions about their behaviour; they were just the most vocal. Not to mention that Fram, for the most part, honoured the terms of the interaction ban from what I understand, while she kept her rant against Fram on the top of her talk page. —A little blue Bori v^_^v 18:57, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Her t/p features a huge prominently displayed banner mentioning Fram, T&S and what not. It was not private, by any reasonable definition of the word and T&S should have expected a major blow-back on her, once they banned Fram. ∯WBG 19:02, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

What? They should have expected it because someone just deserves to be harassed, or because everyone knows the community will find someone to harass? Alanscottwalker (talk) 19:12, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

So what? The community is so dysfunctional, incompetent and cruel, it just has to harass someone? If you have an issue with a banner, the answer is not to harass someone. Alanscottwalker (talk) 19:43, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

You stop it. You don't think someone is harassing, but you think you can stand here and say they deserve blowback because although they are not harassing, you will argue they are something like harassing anyway, under the proposition that 'it can be seen that way'. And on top of that, the community can harass because a third party will not tell the community that person made a complaint. Alanscottwalker (talk) 20:01, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

No. I did not miss what you said, you responded to a statement of concern that in effect 'a person was harassed by the community within the last month', with the unethical rejoinder, that the person was not a saint. When someone is not a saint (and who is), it does not mean they should be harassed, just because a third-party will not tell the community they made a compliant. Alanscottwalker (talk) 20:24, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

So what? The community focuses on someone to harass, just because they can and then turns around to blame someone else else for their harassment for not telling them the person was involved. ('Oh, we're mad at the third party, so let's harass someone we think we can find'). Alanscottwalker (talk) 20:46, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

I see you are just looking for an argument. Very well. I am not going to waste time debating a stone wall. —A little blue Bori v^_^v 20:52, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Not an argument, just telling you that it seems creepy and worse for the community to harass someone, especially so when they say they are mad that some third-party would not say who they are. -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 22:10, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

It's not that "some third-party would not say who they are", more like "some third-party refuses to give any explanation with regards to an involved third-party's ban and said third-party provides what information they can, some of which looks like it implicates the first-party". If the WMF had actually taken the time to explain why Fram's ban was limited, why they could not go thru ArbCom, and why our policies are flawed, we wouldn't be in this mess. —A little blue Bori v^_^v 22:28, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Again creepy and worse, no matter how many words are used to explain the anger at the third party. Alanscottwalker (talk) 22:51, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

It is time for Katherine Maher to Go

Four more administrators down:

* Ad Orientem

* Beeblebrox

* Jonathunder

* DoRD

Awww, but no worries, there are 1,200 administrators, right? Carrite (talk) 15:25, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

On the other hand, most of those admins are from the active admins list, which has 520 names on it right now (and hasn't been updated with several recent resignations, so it'll have fewer tomorrow once the bot runs to update it). And that list only is based on activity as an editor, some on that list do very little with admin tools. This isn't the usual bit of a few admins getting removed because they hadn't been around in a year anyway; those had already left (at least for the time being) and their desysops were a formality. So, yeah, around 20 admins leaving matters. (That's not to say the non-admins who have left don't; many of those will be missed as well, but some of those will just quit editing and not say why). Seraphimblade 23:28, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

My belief is the actual number of administrators on the front lines doing admin-type tasks on a daily or weekly basis is approximately 200. Generating that precise number would be a good topic for research. The community has approved five new Administrators this year, and if we get to double-digits, I will shout a round of beer. Carrite (talk) 12:29, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Carrite, You might find this table helpful S Philbrick(Talk) 14:25, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

@Carrite, you might also be interested in this table, which hasn't been updated for a couple of months but appears to be accurate before then. Although the recent unpleasantness has caused a drop in the 'active admin' count to 520, that still just brings it back to where it was in January, thanks to inactive admins returning in the meantime. Obviously that 520 figure doesn't take into account people who aren't acting in an admin capacity until this is resolved but don't see the point in formally resigning until it's clear which way the Board is going to jump (I have no idea of numbers but I assume there are quite a few), but in terms of raw numbers the resignations just bring us back to where we'd expect to be in terms of long-term decline trend. ‑ Iridescent 19:19, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Now a positive program for a way out of this mess

1. It starts with an "I'm sorry." WMF needs to acknowlege that behavior-banning is not their purview (particularly secretly deliberated, unappealable behavior banning!); they need to acknowledge that they should have stepped back instead of digging in.

2. No matter what WMF thinks of him, Fram's ban needs to be immediately terminated "without prejudice" for being implemented later by Arbcom if the evidence so indicates.

3. Whatever Fram is accused of having done, behavior-wise, should be turned over to the proper channel for this to be handled, which is Arbcom. There has never been a case on this for him, the foundation made an end run around the system here. Let the system work, Arbcom works under non-disclosure agreements of non-public information.

4. Jan Eissfeldt needs to be immediatelty reassigned within the WMF establishment. He doesn't necessarily need to be fired (although that would send a message), but he absolutely needs to be removed from his current position of authority, having lost the confidence of the volunteer community.

5. If WMF is actually interested in some sort of "Universal Code of Behavior," this must be negotiated and debated with the various language communities (not just English-WP). Implementation by fiat would be a catastrophe like the Fram Affair, amplified, simultaneously occurring across multiple wikis.

6. There absolutely needs to be a written constitution delineating roles of the two entities, the paid staff and the volunteer communities. Let each community elect delegates, one for every 500 or 1,000 very active editors (100+ edits per month) or something like that, to meet either in person or with a series of conference calls to hash out details. There needs to be institutional "buy in." Perhaps the "universal code" negotiation could be made part of this.

7. Jimmy Wales needs to personally contact each resigning administrator individually, by email or on-wiki, makes no difference, passing along what has been done and what will be done going forward with respect to the Fram Affair, behavior policing in general, and asking each to reconsider their decision since we do need their talent and the way to stop the quits is by turning around the school bus.

8. The WMF board should start looking for a new ED by the end of the year. This is not strictly essential, politically, but it is getting untenable for the current ED to continue given the magnitude of the mishandling of this affair.

-- Tim Davenport /// Carrite (talk) 15:51, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Excellent plan. With emphasis on a new constitution, with broader changes, because the current one is at the fundamental root of this problem and many others. North8000 (talk) 16:26, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Carrite's plan is a path forward, Jimbo. The departure of so many excellent editors and administrators is shocking and disheartening to me and countless others. Things cannot continue like this. Do something. Do the right thing. Cullen Let's discuss it 17:20, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

• I concur with the above. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:37, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
• Point by point, this is the best way out of this mess, with the exception that Eissfeldt should leave the WMF entirely given the entire de.wp superprotect debacle. He's unlikely to have much trust in the communities after this. —A little blue Bori v^_^v 18:59, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Carrite, Sorry, this is a non-starter. I understand the sentiment, but to assert that the WMF should give up the authority to ban an editor for behavioral reasons isn't happening. That's not to say that this incident was well-handled, and there's room for imprving the prcess, but I cannot imagine that the WMF would remotely agree that they would never institute such a ban. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:13, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

A nuclear option should remain in the new constitution, but treated as such. But in the big picture, the "WMF agrtee" is the tail wagging the dog. If they won't agree that the new constitution is binding, we'll replace them. North8000 (talk) 19:20, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

• This is the cleanest way to resolve the community concerns at this point. Tazerdadog (talk) 19:15, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

• I mostly concur with this proposal, but would leave the firing and demoting to the people empowered to deal with that. I would also add, that there needs to be a forum for active, ground level dialog between the WMF and the enwiki community. A central noticeboard would work pretty well for that, but it would require that whatever WMF employees are assigned to liaise with the community actually respond to good faith questions and engage as equal partners. Anything short of that should be regarded as failure.- MrX 🖋 19:25, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

  @MrX, AFAIK Whatamidoing (WMF) is the usual WMF ambassador to we peasantry. In my experience she's generally fairly quick to respond to good-faith questions, even if the answer is just "I don't know, I'll need to get back to you". ‑ Iridescent 19:30, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

  Oh, I thought Whatamidoing was more of a technical liaison.- MrX 🖋 19:47, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

• I think this is certainly a great way forward, The WMF have had 2 (nearly 3!) weeks to say something or even do something and so it's about time it was moved forward be it through them or us, I appreciate things take time and all but 2 weeks of waiting as well as generic walls of text in the first few days doesn't cut it. –Davey2010 19:32, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
• I heartily concur with Carrite's plan. Except that it doesn't go far enough - this is a golden opportunity for a thorough shake up of the WMF's structure and responsibilities, and something on the lines of MrX's suggestion while devolving much of the WMF's work to the communities or a joint community committee, with all major developments and castle-in-the-sky plans for the future to be decided by community referendum. That would avoid some of the stupid wastes of money. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:48, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
• Carrite has spoken some good sense. Is anyone that matters (in this instance, at the WMF) listening? Vanamonde (Talk) 21:05, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
• I support the plan, too. I'd especially like to encourage you to do #7. The many resignations represent a very severe hemorrhage of the project, and you are in a position to do some meaningful healing. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:07, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
• I don't think #2 can happen without removing T&S entirely. However, this seems a better plan than those proposed in WP:FRAMBAN. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 21:22, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
• On #1, I would want them to continue handling bans related to law enforcement type stuff, such as child protection or threatening violence, but anyone who does those things should be banned globally and permanently, not for a year from a single project. However, what we should do is to codify exactly what situations will be handled that way, and then to ban someone for any reason outside of those would actually constitute libel. I also don't like the idea of a "rules committee"; each project should decide on its own rules (and in reality, the committee proposal would result in the English Misplaced Pages essentially setting the rules for everyone, and I doubt that's a situation other projects would welcome with open arms; we'd most likely see reactions very much like ours to the FRAMBAN). Let each project continue to set its own rules. But outside of that, I think this is a good starting point for discussion, especially actually codifying the respective roles of the WMF and volunteer communities. Seraphimblade 22:38, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
• I'll put a link to Misplaced Pages:Community response to the Wikimedia Foundation's ban of Fram#The WMF is disconnected from the editing community because I think it would be good for Jimmy to look at it. Thanks. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:00, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
• Support, except perhaps for number 7. I, for one, don't need any message from Jimbo about anything. Deor (talk) 04:39, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
• Thank you, Carrite. Unfortunately, I suspect your advice will fall on deaf ears. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:39, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
• There is nothing in this proposal that suggests an effective way to handle editor harassment which is at the heart of this whole issue. ArbCom's open letter today states that they have not handled it well, at all. The Signpost article states that multiple editors had complained that they experienced harassment. WMF felt they had to step in because Misplaced Pages hasn't effectively addressed harassment and stalking when it occurs. I can't support a proposal that asks for replacement of WMF staff members when it doesn't provide a self-reflective critique on how Misplaced Pages can improve its inept mishandling of harassment complaints. If ArbCom admits that they aren't handling harassment complaints well, then of course, WMF will step in to fill the void of inaction.

Let's make the situation here one where WMF won't feel the need to step in because Misplaced Pages can handle policing itself. Now that is a proposal I would sign off on. Liz 22:56, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

• He Jimbo, this is just a note to indicate that there are people who don't agree with the mob, please take us into account as well. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 07:27, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

The June 2019 Signpost is out!

• Discussion report: A constitutional crisis hits English Misplaced Pages

• News and notes: Mysterious ban, admin resignations, Wikimedia Thailand rising

• In the media: The disinformation age

• On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?

• Traffic report: Juneteenth, Beauty Revealed, and more nuclear disasters

• Technology report: Actors and Bots

• Gallery: Unlike the North Face, Wiki Loves Earth

• Special report: Did Fram harass other editors?

• Recent research: What do editors do after being blocked?; the top mathematicians, universities and cancers according to Misplaced Pages

• From the archives: Women and Misplaced Pages: the world is watching

• Opinion: Why the Terms of Use change didn't curtail undisclosed paid editing—and what might

• In focus: WikiJournals: A sister project proposal

• Community view: A CEO biography, paid for with taxes

• Op-Ed: 2019 Wikimedia Affiliate Selected Board Seats Election Results

Thank you for making Misplaced Pages!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thank you! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TomSmithNP (talk • contribs) 18:59, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Agree. Thank you Jimbo! You do make the world better than ever! --It's gonna be awesome!✎Talk♬ 19:33, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

For goodness sake don't stop w just Fram!!!

Jimb I'm one of not a few wiki peasants thirsty for a full reign of terror on caustic admins and other prolific eds to begin. ( - Btw from your pic w/i the BuzzFeed piece looks like you should start walking around the block more. I was there a month or so ago & it's worked for me. :~)--20:45, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

I should be careful of what you wish for, remember Maximilien Robespierre and Philippe Égalité! However, also be aware Jimbo is not too fond of comparisons to the French Revolution. Giano (talk) 21:19, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Ouch. So you're saying Jimbo is just a bit too fond of cake, yes? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:28, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Most certainly not, that would be “pot and Kettle” in my case.Giano (talk) 21:31, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

That's just the Good Ol' Alabama Boy FINALLY starting to show up. Nothin' he can do about it. Nocturnalnow (talk) 03:33, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Good admins are the heart of this project; and we're hemorrhaging

If you've lost Beeblebrox and Floquenbeam, that alone should tell you that something is deeply wrong. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:08, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Heart of the community is our editors. ..Misplaced Pages currently has (119,842 active editors that have edited in the last 30 days), and only very very small minority of those contributors participate in community discussions and have no clue that a few dozen administrators are not here.--Moxy 🍁 01:23, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

They would have an idea that someone wasn't here if the active vandals aren't blocked. (Note: I am not advocating that Admins fail to act, as a protest.) — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:23, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

This would be why many decade editors think unbundling tools and allocating some of them to oldtimers would help. Community wouldn't be interrupted by a power struggle by those we entrusted to keep things going.--Moxy 🍁 02:36, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Upcoming

The Board met yesterday to work on a full statement about this. It's not easy getting to consensus with a large group, but overall I think people are going to be happy with the statement and with the things we are asking the WMF staff to do going forward. As one board member wasn't present, we decided to give a bit more time so that we can get to unanimity.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 11:15, 1 July 2019 (UTC)