Content deleted Content added
Just Step Sideways (talk | contribs) Tag: Reply |
Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 51) (bot Tag: Replaced |
||
(11 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown) | |||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
__TOC__ |
__TOC__ |
||
== Changes to the functionaries team, May 2024 == |
|||
: [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Changes to the functionaries team, May 2024|'''Original announcement''']]<!-- [[User:ArbClerkBot|ArbClerkBot]] ([[User talk:ArbClerkBot|talk]]) 14:27, 1 May 2024 (UTC) --><!--Template:hes--> |
|||
:Thank you for your service as an oversighter. – [[User:Dudhhr|dudhhr]]<small><sup> [[User talk:Dudhhr|talk]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contribs/Dudhhr|contribs]]</sub><sup>she</sup><sub>her</sub></small> 17:02, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Thank you for all your hard work, [[User:Dreamy Jazz|Dreamy Jazz]]. '''[[User:L235|KevinL]]''' (<small>aka</small> [[User:L235|L235]] '''·''' [[User talk:L235#top|t]] '''·''' [[Special:Contribs/L235|c]]) 17:52, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::From me too! [[User:ToBeFree|~ ToBeFree]] ([[User talk:ToBeFree|talk]]) 21:16, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mzajac]] closed == |
|||
: [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mzajac closed|'''Original announcement''']]<!-- [[User:ArbClerkBot|ArbClerkBot]] ([[User talk:ArbClerkBot|talk]]) 21:01, 7 May 2024 (UTC) --><!--Template:hes--> |
|||
And yet another administrator decides to pull a 172 exit instead of accepting accountability for their actions. I'd hope admins that get dragged to ArbCom actually have the moral fortitude to admit their failings rather than just ragequit. —[[User:Jéské Couriano|<i style="color: #1E90FF;">Jéské Couriano</i>]] [[User talk:Jéské Couriano|<span style="color: #228B22">v^_^v</span>]] <sup><small>[[User:Jéské Couriano/AG|AE thread summaries]]</small></sup> 03:49, 8 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:172? [[User:Robertsky|– robertsky]] ([[User talk:Robertsky|talk]]) 10:40, 8 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Yeah, I was wondering about that. All I can come up with for "172 exit" is articles about how to jump out of a [[Cessna 172]] while skydiving :-) [[User:RoySmith|RoySmith]] [[User Talk:RoySmith|(talk)]] 12:42, 8 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Or it could have to do with [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/172 2]] :). [[User:Lectonar|Lectonar]] ([[User talk:Lectonar|talk]]) 12:54, 8 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Lectonar has it right in one. [[User:172|172]] was the first admin to be deopped as a result of refusing to respond to an Arbitration, and it's 172 2 that lays out the reasoning and rationale for all other "refusal to respond to Arbitration" deops since. —[[User:Jéské Couriano|<i style="color: #1E90FF;">Jéské Couriano</i>]] [[User talk:Jéské Couriano|<span style="color: #228B22">v^_^v</span>]] <sup><small>[[User:Jéské Couriano/AG|AE thread summaries]]</small></sup> 15:46, 8 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I can't say I don't get it. When one is confronted with a list of one's failings, and asked to particate in a process that will almost certainly end with them losing their position, walking away isn't that hard to imagine. Of course they could just resign as an admin and go back to editing, and I am sure I have seen others do that ''without'' admitting they ever made a single mistake, but people are people and react differently to things. At least they didn't do like some and just pretend to have some real-life crisis that flares up every time they are under scrutiny, to me that is the most despiciable option. [[User:Just Step Sideways|Just Step Sideways]] [[User talk:Just Step Sideways|<sup>from this world ..... today</sup>]] 17:17, 8 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Obviously this is circumstance-dependent, but actually engaging with arbitration substantially reduces your chances of getting de-sysopped, while refusing to participate makes it a near-certainty. [[User:GiantSnowman|GiantSnowman]] (courtesy ping) participated fully in the arb case about him, and in the end was courageous enough to accept that he had made mistakes and to take steps not to repeat them. I was proud to be the deciding vote against de-sysopping him and I would do it again; GS is a net positive to the project and I'm glad he's still around with the mop. I hope other arbs would react similarly to those with the willingness to be so accountable. Had GS refused to engage, it would have been an entirely different case and we would have lost a good admin and a good editor had he chosen to retire. ♠[[User:Premeditated Chaos|PMC]]♠ [[User_talk:Premeditated Chaos|(talk)]] 18:38, 8 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Having gone through the process, I can empathise somewhat with those who don't engage - but as PMC says, I know that if I hadn't the outcome would have been very different and I would have massively regretted that. Engaging helped me see where I had gone wrong and how to correct it. It was ultimately a useful and cathartic process, even if it didn't seem like it at the time... [[User:GiantSnowman|Giant]][[User talk:GiantSnowman|Snowman]] 18:56, 8 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::I find JSS incredibly convincing in any given situation when he argues that any admin with a restriction should not be an admin. But I continue to find it not so compelling in the abstract. I would also just note that besides GS, [[User:Maxim/ArbCom and desysops]] shows that admins can participate and not be desyopped (though this is '''far''' more likely in a group rather than individual case). [[User:Barkeep49|Barkeep49]] ([[User_talk:Barkeep49|talk]]) 19:01, 8 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::I suspect that if somehow it were me I'd stick and face the case, even knowing the odds are not on my side, but I also get it when they choose to walk away or not present a defense, although leaving the project entirely in the face of a case obviously more or less guarantees a desysop. We've certainly seen the scenario where an admin has a chance to escape being sanctioned but their behavior during the case convinces the committee that they aren't suited for adminship. Despite my hardline stance, I did always remind myself to be open to the possibility that they just made a couple mistakes. We're all (theoretically) humans here after all. [[User:Just Step Sideways|Just Step Sideways]] [[User talk:Just Step Sideways|<sup>from this world ..... today</sup>]] 22:13, 8 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::I would also add, however, that the committee is, in my opinion, sometimes too hesitant to just resolve by motion. Two cases I was a party to were exceedingly obvious cases where the only reasonable decision was a desysop. [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fred Bauder]] in paticular did not need to be a full case and became a complete circus during the workshop phase. [[User:Just Step Sideways|Just Step Sideways]] [[User talk:Just Step Sideways|<sup>from this world ..... today</sup>]] 22:23, 8 May 2024 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:58, 19 May 2024
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Wikipedia Arbitration |
---|
|
Track related changes |
Behaviour on this page: This page is for discussing announcements relating to the Arbitration Committee. Editors commenting here are required to act with appropriate decorum. While grievances, complaints, or criticism of arbitration decisions are frequently posted here, you are expected to present them without being rude or hostile. Comments that are uncivil may be removed without warning. Personal attacks against other users, including arbitrators or the clerks, will be met with sanctions.