Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:52, 19 September 2009

• Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Geogre-William_M._Connolley
• Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Climate change dispute (And don't miss part II)
• My comments on the SA appeal can be found via

Interesting. There are limits to incivility on your own talk page to some peoples surprise . Since it would be odd to put this here and not comment, let me make it plain that I agree with Jimbo's actions.

Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Obama_articles/Proposed_decision - some interesting principles.

Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Abd-William M. Connolley

Looks like I need a new section for this. And a new section needs a quote:

To all the friends I used to have yo I miss my past
But the rest of you arseholes can kiss my arse

Eminen, as I'm sure you'll recognise . It isn't quite right, as the friends are still there. Suggestions for a better? Maybe ?

More later.

BTW, you may feel free to join in (unless you're one of the Dark Side, of course). Improvements are welcome. Though I should warn you that helping here is liable to Blot Your Copybook. Of course, anything I leave here becomes my responsibility and you may assume I agree with it.

Executive summary

This entire case was a waste of time. The correct response for arbcomm was to reject it. Having accepted it, they were then grossly negligent by (a) failing to keep it on time (b) failing to impose meaningful limits on the volume of dross produced (c) failing to read the evidence, which was unreadable, due to b (d) most of arbcomm didn't bother to participate (e) all of which lead to producing a bad judgement.

On Abd

Contrary to what appears to be the general impression, I bear Abd no ill-will. He is a waste of time, true, but so are many people. He wasted vast amounts of peoples time, true, but so do many people. It is not his fault that arbcomm made the error of accepting the case - that is all theirs. He spewed vast volumes of unreadable repetitious words onto the case pages, but again, that is just his nature, you can't blame him for that - the fault is shared (in a proportion I leave them to determine) between arbcomm and the clerk for permitting this to happen. Having made the case unmanageable abcomm then proceeded to produce the wrong answer, and clearly they are entirely responsible for their judgement.

Misc thoughts on arbcomm and its errors

Clearly an arbcomm that can go this badly wrong has a lot of problems; I won't be able to discuss them all. But the obvious flaws are:

• Jealousy. I don't think they want anyone getting too uppity.
• Incompetence. Despite their desire to keep Ultimate Power to themselves, they just aren't capable of weilding it. That they cannot do so in a timely fashion is obvious. That they cannot even get the right answer may be less clear to you (though not to me).
• Opacity. All meaningful communication between arbs is going on behind our backs. This is wrong. Everything possible should be done in the open. The reason it isn't is the obvious: it wouldn't stand up to scrutiny.
• Inability to communicate. Rarely, arbs will say something but this is not a meaningful dialogue. It is just a random statement; if it contains falsehoods, the arb will not come back to correct them when challenged.
• Malice. Hard to substantiate this one, but I think it is there, so I'm going to write it down. Linked to: they do nothing to earn respect, and yet "mark you down" for failure to show respect.

On the naming of names

Note: it is possible to be in more than one section.

Utterly rubbish

Needs a better name.

• User:Stephen Bain Too rubbish to really analyse in detail. Posting a proposed decision to the workshop page that was ripped to shreds, failing to defend it, and then re-posting on the proposed decion page is probably his major sin. is an indication of how grossly uncivil he has been.

Foolishness

• User:Vassyana
• User:Risker (that whole thread)

Cowards

• User:Risker. Flings insults and runs away when called on it .

Should I stay or should I go?

Or, less cryptically, which of the rabs do I think have made errors so severe as to warrant their departure? Bear in mind that I'm not exactly expecting to exert any great influence here, so if you're on the list don't expect me to come after you. And if you feel lonely there, don't worry, this isn't finished.

• User:Vassyana While technically true, I see the resulting implications of this finding to be extremely inaccurate. In that context, this is an inappropriate complete exoneration. There is certainly a kernel of truth to the concerns in that there is a certain indentifiable group that appears to act in a mutually supporting fashion. While this is often innocuous and for the good of the project, that is not always the case. The most obvious and inappropriate way this evidences itself is in community discussions where outside opinion is being solicited and/or should be heeded. Conduct threads and content policy consultations are commonly overwhelmed by involved opinion and regularly featured involved editors !voting and/or commenting as though they were uninvolved users providing an opinion. While we should indeed waive off the harsher accusations and extreme language of cabals and meatpuppetry, we should not do so in a way that implicitly endorses negative behavior falling under the spirit of the principles opposing cabalism and meatpuppetry. Several commentators have noted what a disaster this comment would be, if taken seriously. As a minority opinion it is of no great importance for the case result; as an indication of V's judgement it is telling.

How did I vote?

• Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Carcharoth - oppose "logs; failure to answer G4" (note the rather ironic S138 Support we need greater science focus on WP). Logs will mean actions; G4 is I think Pick one arbitration case opened in the last year that contains a final decision with which you disagree. How do you think the case should have been handled, what different proposals would you have made, etc.? - prescient
• Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2008/Vote/Casliber - oppose log; G.4
• Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2008/Vote/Risker - support
• Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Roger Davies - support

Out of curiosity

Roger Davies and Carcharoth are both "open to recall" as admins. I don't know if it is better for the project to draw a veil over it or go ahead and ask them what the recall procedures are, basis lack of judgement shown on Arbcom removes community confidence in judgement as admin. I am not sure they are wise to be open to recall. The rules as stated mean they go to RFA if enough people of good standing request it rather than as a result of a majority vote where they could do their own special arthimetic. Courting contraversy is difficult in those circumstances. But I am not sure the "open to recall" has ever been used so it would be interesting to try. Also some justice in them having to RFA again as well, the Mikado would be pleased. --BozMo talk 09:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

You are a trouble maker. However, I think a better tack would be to ask if they are arbs open to recall. I have no interest in their admin status and I'd rather not get into the admin-arb link William M. Connolley (talk) 11:56, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Slander! I am not a trouble maker but confess I am a bit irritated by the affair, as well as concerned that there is significant collateral damage to WP itself. I care about WP because its existence and success makes me feel very positively about human nature. Of course it was partly your fault in presuming that they were not so human as to be negatively influenced by provocation just because you had all the natural justice on your side, but we both know that. --BozMo talk 12:08, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Me and John Vandenberg are open to recall as arbitrators. I don't think any others are at this time. Cool Hand Luke 16:00, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Surely, *I* and JV :-). But neither of you voted, so we don't care :-(.

Well, personally I do care, and think it impressive of you. But not a way we can let a little steam off right now :) --BozMo talk 20:37, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not open for recall as an arbitrator (though I am as an admin, as you correctly note). My views on arbitrator recall were given in my answers to the election questions. Those are here (search for 'recall' - there are several answers where I touch on the subject). What I have instead is a pledge to be open and responsive to concerns and criticisms. I have an unfinished page here, and recently (in response to other criticism) started this page. Once that is done, there will be lots of opportunity to criticise (as well as a realisation of the workload of arbitrators). If you have questions relating to any of my arbitration activities (whether listed there or not), please do ask them there (remembering to leave me a talk page alert). If you want a more general overview of arbitration activities (at least for the first half of the year), please see this report. I know WMC has already seen that, but I'm noting it here for anyone else reading this. Carcharoth (talk) 01:43, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I know arbitrators have a lot to do and that a lot of the work of arbitrating cases if done properly is incredibly time consuming. It does raise the question of why you took on this case (perhaps as a matter of policy you should only take on cases if there are a considerable number of admins on both sides) and also why you desysoped a top drawer sysop if you did not have time to go through everything (which I take it is the implication of this defence). I have been a CEO for 15 years and I don't ever give sympathy for overwork when people control their own workload. Trolls can always attack with huge volumes of complaints which happened here. If you are after sympathy I suggest a display of remorse helps (actually that goes for WMC too but he doesn't seem to be after sympathy). Otherwise not being open to recall is fine but you also have to realise your general admiration score has taken a knock. And as I have said elsewhere in my experience (as someone who has had a bad block overturned by WMC for giving the wrong block reason) he has laways displayed an attention to detail and fairness which was lacking in the treatment of this case/ --BozMo talk 05:43, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Meanwhile, since we're on to general irritation, does anyone else find Misplaced Pages:AC/N#Full_clerkships spectacularly ill-timed? William M. Connolley (talk) 16:22, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Not really. There was a set amount of stuff we wanted the trainee clerks to have had experience with, and the point when that was reached happened to coincide with the end of the case you were involved in. Nothing more or less than that. Carcharoth (talk) 01:43, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

So it was just a question of time served - there was no idea of any form of evaluation of their performance at all? William M. Connolley (talk) 07:41, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Not at all. If we were unhappy with any of the trainee clerks recently promoted, we wouldn't have made them full clerks. i.e. these trainees being made full clerks is an implicit endorsement of their performance as trainee clerks. Carcharoth (talk) 18:21, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

So you view the clerking of Abd-WMC as being satisfactory or better, then? William M. Connolley (talk) 18:37, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

We could have a long discussion about that, couldn't we? But am I really going to dissuade you of your overall opinion there? I think it is clear what I think and what you think. And in general, I think you need to take a different approach here, and stop trying to pick holes in every last thing you can find that you think was wrong with this case. By all means do a detailed criticism of the case (I wish more people would do that with other cases), but give it some time first, and when you do write that criticism, use non-inflammatory language and avoid calling people names. Doing a calm and dispassionate analysis will make your case for you much better, and you might get more people listening to you. Carcharoth (talk) 18:52, 19 September 2009 (UTC)