5 ms·

He was told (in 2017 and 2019) to completely avoid interacting with her and her content. The notice Fram posted himself was quite clear - don't report her conte

He was told (in 2017 and 2019) to completely avoid interacting with her and her content. The notice Fram posted himself was quite clear - don't report her content, don't edit her content, don't interact with her in any way. That's quite serious. How does someone get a warning like that from WMF?

nsajko 7y ago
Your comment is problematic for responding to because it is not clear if it is asking a question (and which question) or is it trying to say something between the lines. But I will try anyway: Essentially you are trying to say that Fram is a harasser because he got a warning from T&S. But that is not how T&S works. They (as far as is publicly known) react to any reports of misbehavior with (without investigation) trying to deescalate the situation by asking to stop interaction between concerned parties. Usually this only applies to Wikimedia staff, contractors, participants at Wikimedia events, etc. The fact that Fram even got a "warning" from the T&S is quite damning for T&S because they usually do not meddle in such stuff as was happening between him and LauraHale (for the uninitiated, she was writing a lot of, let us say it bluntly, crap articles and edits [0]; and he was, as a good editor, trying to fix those edits repeatedly), because of the implicated power that you can have over the Wikimedia communities by knowing someone on T&S and/or the Board. [0] She was writing duplicate paragraphs and mistranslating from a language she does not speak in an absurd manner. Edit: I deleted unfounded speculation I made against LauraHale. Sorry.
- geofft 7y ago
  > She was writing duplicate paragraphs (maybe to gain a greater edit count?) and mistranslating from a language she does not speak in an absurd manner. This is quite an accusation. Please stop lynching her.
  - nsajko 7y ago
    You got a point there, I edited my comment accordingly. And I did not down-vote you, nor would I do it if I could.
  - darawk 7y ago
    Are there not public records of these things that we can verify from?
belorn 7y ago
WMF wrote: "To be clear, we are not placing an interaction ban between you and Laura at this time". "We remain convinced that the activity on Laura’s articles listed above was not intended to intimidate or make her feel uncomfortable".
- unreal37 7y ago
  Cherry picking lines out of context. A poor counter-argument. The statement before the one you posted was quite clear. Do not interact with her in any way. At all. Nothing. Don't even contact other admins and ask them to do it.
  - belorn 7y ago
    Then why did they clarify specifically that this was not an interaction ban.What was the purpose of both lines if they thought Fram did harass her and thus wanted to impose a interaction ban? The problem with the accusation of cherry picking is that I don't have an issue if you would include the full text. In context it is pretty clear that what they wanted was to prevent any further friction between the two editors. If they thought it was harassment and they intended to issue a punitive action then they would have done that. WMF is quite cable to call out harassment without needing to wrapping it up with false statements of "To be clear, we are not placing an interaction ban" and "We remain convinced that it was not intended to intimidate or make her feel uncomfortable".

nsajko 7y ago

Your comment is problematic for responding to because it is not clear if it is asking a question (and which question) or is it trying to say something between the lines. But I will try anyway: Essentially you are trying to say that Fram is a harasser because he got a warning from T&S. But that is not how T&S works. They (as far as is publicly known) react to any reports of misbehavior with (without investigation) trying to deescalate the situation by asking to stop interaction between concerned parties. Usually this only applies to Wikimedia staff, contractors, participants at Wikimedia events, etc. The fact that Fram even got a "warning" from the T&S is quite damning for T&S because they usually do not meddle in such stuff as was happening between him and LauraHale (for the uninitiated, she was writing a lot of, let us say it bluntly, crap articles and edits [0]; and he was, as a good editor, trying to fix those edits repeatedly), because of the implicated power that you can have over the Wikimedia communities by knowing someone on T&S and/or the Board. [0] She was writing duplicate paragraphs and mistranslating from a language she does not speak in an absurd manner. Edit: I deleted unfounded speculation I made against LauraHale. Sorry.

geofft 7y ago
> She was writing duplicate paragraphs (maybe to gain a greater edit count?) and mistranslating from a language she does not speak in an absurd manner. This is quite an accusation. Please stop lynching her.
- nsajko 7y ago
  You got a point there, I edited my comment accordingly. And I did not down-vote you, nor would I do it if I could.
- darawk 7y ago
  Are there not public records of these things that we can verify from?

belorn 7y ago

WMF wrote: "To be clear, we are not placing an interaction ban between you and Laura at this time". "We remain convinced that the activity on Laura’s articles listed above was not intended to intimidate or make her feel uncomfortable".

unreal37 7y ago
Cherry picking lines out of context. A poor counter-argument. The statement before the one you posted was quite clear. Do not interact with her in any way. At all. Nothing. Don't even contact other admins and ask them to do it.
- belorn 7y ago
  Then why did they clarify specifically that this was not an interaction ban.What was the purpose of both lines if they thought Fram did harass her and thus wanted to impose a interaction ban? The problem with the accusation of cherry picking is that I don't have an issue if you would include the full text. In context it is pretty clear that what they wanted was to prevent any further friction between the two editors. If they thought it was harassment and they intended to issue a punitive action then they would have done that. WMF is quite cable to call out harassment without needing to wrapping it up with false statements of "To be clear, we are not placing an interaction ban" and "We remain convinced that it was not intended to intimidate or make her feel uncomfortable".