Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Wikipidiots atwitter about Arbcom-L leak
> Wikimedia Discussion > Bureaucracy > The ArbCom-L Leaks
Pages: 1, 2
EricBarbour
QUOTE(tarantino @ Mon 27th June 2011, 7:45pm) *

Here is a statement from an anonymous onlooker.
QUOTE
Personally, I think WR is being manipulated.

I'm starting to suspect this may be correct. If those were truly honest leaks, don't you think the WMF and current ArBlubberers would be somewhat more angry and demonstrative? Instead, we get an objection from Coren, and near-total silence from everyone else. Yes, someone's pulling a dirty trick.

(If anyone wants a REAL slab of dirt, PM me. Courtesy of their "archenemy" Tim Usher, as it happens.)
Kelly Martin
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Tue 28th June 2011, 3:40pm) *
I'm starting to suspect this may be correct. If those were truly honest leaks, don't you think the WMF and current ArBlubberers would be somewhat more angry and demonstrative? Instead, we get an objection from Coren, and near-total silence from everyone else. Yes, someone's pulling a dirty trick.
That would imply a remarkable degree of heartlessness with respect to the leak regarding the former arbcommer who was blackmailed into resigning (the content of which has been suppressed even here, for good cause, but which was posted and visible for several hours). If this is all just a "dirty trick" on Wikipedia Review, then they are just heartless bastards who will fry one of their own just for a few yuks. Which, to me, suggests that David Gerard is behind it somehow or another.
LessHorrid vanU
QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Tue 28th June 2011, 9:47pm) *

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Tue 28th June 2011, 3:40pm) *
I'm starting to suspect this may be correct. If those were truly honest leaks, don't you think the WMF and current ArBlubberers would be somewhat more angry and demonstrative? Instead, we get an objection from Coren, and near-total silence from everyone else. Yes, someone's pulling a dirty trick.
That would imply a remarkable degree of heartlessness with respect to the leak regarding the former arbcommer who was blackmailed into resigning (the content of which has been suppressed even here, for good cause, but which was posted and visible for several hours). If this is all just a "dirty trick" on Wikipedia Review, then they are just heartless bastards who will fry one of their own just for a few yuks. Which, to me, suggests that David Gerard is behind it somehow or another.


I love you.
EricBarbour
QUOTE(LessHorrid vanU @ Tue 28th June 2011, 2:13pm) *

I love you.

I'll take that as a "yeah, it's probably Gerard". tongue.gif
MZMcBride
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Tue 28th June 2011, 2:30pm) *
QUOTE(MZMcBride @ Mon 27th June 2011, 7:16pm) *
Carcharoth posted a statement on his user page that he asked I reference here.
Might as well post it:
QUOTE(Carcharoth)
Note on the off-wiki June 2011 publication of posts from the arbcom-l mailing list: Some of what I wrote on the arbcom-l mailing list while I was an arbitrator has been published in various forums on Wikipedia Review (starting in June 2011, along with many other posts from the archives), I've been following some of those threads and the responses and analysis there. The following is a brief general response on my part, and is likely to be all I have to say on the matter unless I am asked directly about a specific issue. From what I've seen so far, while some of the correct conclusions are being drawn in some of the Wikipedia Review threads, in some discussions people are going off on a tangent and/or misunderstanding things because context is missing, or they are cherry-picking things to draw conclusions they want to reach. My view is that unless the wider context is included, any analysis of these archives (some of which I have not seen either) should be treated with caution, especially considering the source and the selective method of release of the posts.
Carcharoth is one of the admins I've noted in the past for his lack of being a WP:DICK (which makes him stand out). But his statement above is kind of useless. No piece of information is ever as useful as it would be without "wider context", but since this is a bunch of secret leaks, we're not going to get that, and are unlikely to in the foreseeable future. So the idea that we should not draw any conclusions in the meantime is rather silly. We'll never have all the information we need for any purpose anywhere, on this planet, in this life. We're stuck with the job of thinking with the information we DO have, in the meantime. That is all. It's a continuous fact-of-life and it's inescapable.

If Carcharoth has any information he'd like to add to help WR put this arbcom-l information "in wider context" he's welcome to post it. Otherwise, quit whining. You can't keep some bunch of crap secret, then complain that people are apt to fill in (strange 17-minute) gaps for themselves, when they find out the rest of it. What exactly do you expect? The gaps are YOUR fault. Nobody's going to keep an open mind and suspend judgment due to lack of information, when YOU-ALL are the one withholding it.

This is very reminiscent of the govenment, which normally "classifies" its crimes, lies, and mistakes-- then goes off on a tangent about espionage and national security when somebody finds out some of the dirt. Sorry, but nobody should be deflected from finding out about malice and incompetence, when secrecy is not the real issue and never was. When secrecy is mere coverup for crimes, lies and mistakes, it should be seen as what it is, which is abetting, further lying, and coverup that propagates error in the future, including all future damage that will be caused. Such secrecy is no more deserving of respect than the confidences kept by any person of ill-will and ill-action. Which is to say, it's not. It requires sunlight as disinfectant. We'd like to hear all those whitehouse tapes.

Fuck you with the partial transcripts we already have, Tricky Dicks.
Carc asked me to post a response to your post (which he described as baiting, and I'd tend to agree). This will be the last time I proxy for Mr. Carcharoth for now. You're free to e-mail him as you see fit.
QUOTE
1) Unlike those reading WR, I can compare what is being released with
the copies of the posts I received at the time, and I can draw
conclusions from this (and the responses to the "requests" being made
of 'Malice') that those without copies of what was said elsewhere on
the mailing list (in the wider context) cannot.

2) About the offer to post to WR, thanks but no thanks.
I'll note that I'd completely forgotten that Mr. Carcharoth is no longer an Arbitrator, and I think many others have forgotten this or don't realize it. His term expired in December 2010, (among other things) removing all his access to the archives, etc.
MZMcBride
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Tue 28th June 2011, 5:14pm) *
QUOTE(LessHorrid vanU @ Tue 28th June 2011, 2:13pm) *
I love you.
I'll take that as a "yeah, it's probably Gerard". tongue.gif
There are some clues in MaliceAforethought's posts, but I don't think most of them point to Mr. Gerard.
Kelly Martin
At this point I think Carcaroth is attempting to create the belief that the leaks are fabricated, without actually saying as much. Given that, and some other things that have happened, I also believe that Carcaroth is more than capable of posting on WR if he wants to, using any of the number of secret socks he almost certainly has here. Don't act surprised, we know that virtually everyone on the ArbCom has at least one account here.
SpiderAndWeb
QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Wed 29th June 2011, 2:58am) *

At this point I think Carcaroth is attempting to create the belief that the leaks are fabricated, without actually saying as much. Given that, and some other things that have happened, I also believe that Carcaroth is more than capable of posting on WR if he wants to, using any of the number of secret socks he almost certainly has here. Don't act surprised, we know that virtually everyone on the ArbCom has at least one account here.


Link?

If true then this approach is truly bizarre, as if the leaks were fabricated the Committee would have jumped on that explanation instantly when the drama re Malleus and Iridescent first appeared on-wiki.
SB_Johnny
QUOTE
Well an Arb's email was hacked a few months ago, I realised it when the esteemed Arb began trying to sell me viagra; I emailed him to negotiate a better price; he said his account had been hacked and that was the end of the story. I'm sure the Arbcom know all about it. I'm not sure of the exact dates because I deleted the email in case it was a virus, anyway it hardly seemed important at the time. I only remembered it recently because a nephew left his account open in an Australian internet cafe and he suddenly began trying to sell me vigra too - why do these people think I need viagra? Giacomo (talk) 22:02, 2 July 2011 (UTC)


I got some of those from a certain WR contributor a few months ago as well.... fear.gif
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.