User talk:SA 13 Bro

w:WP:Fram

 * I don't think that Fram should be unbanned right now, since he had some certain history of long-term bad civility records. On MediaWiki his block log is a good place for verification, when I has viewed 28bytes had post the question on 31 July, later I also went to MediaWiki have a refer of looks on his talk page and is clear for it, but I don't deem that Fram had harassing other users in the past ago unless got evidence to proof on it. IMO about Fram should get some certain period of Wikibreak and reform away his bad civility behavior, I can pretty sure that T&S office staffs won't ban any users in random way as what wrote here, don't know what TRM mind are thinking about. When a user has incivility manner such as making personal attack toward other editor due to content dispute, and the user email complaint to T&S, the office staffs usually will email a conduct warning notice to the incivility manner editor first, unless that user persistently in disruptive behavior, then the T&S may discretion for the ban on that editor. SA 13 Bro (talk) 02:27, 18 August 2019 (UTC)


 * [redacted] --- Testing this Thing   09:47, 18 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I am not completely familiarize about Fram case on English Wikipedia, although I am aware his long-term bad civility behavior on MediaWiki, but I do agree that steward Ajraddatz on WMF has stated here regarding the community are incompetent to handle the incivility case, or else it won't let WMF to deal the Fram case and get sanctioned by the office action, since ArbCom are the authority who in charge and self governing the community, maybe you can try for waiting someone else to join the discussions. SA</b> 1</b>3</b> B</b>r</b>o</b> (talk) 13:18, 18 August 2019 (UTC)


 * [redacted] --- Testing this Thing   05:33, 19 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Regarding Ban on Fram,
 * I think such bans should be implemented across projects, to prevent an upsurge of such users from other projects where they are not even active.
 * I strongly believe that, local communities and process fail many a times to deal with incivility cases, specially gender based or sexuality based violences/incivilities/not being nice etc etc. And they have been abusive to a range of the user's from diverse social locations. So it's not a single incident or single group which faced abuse from them triggered this office ban, but several such instances piling on resulted in this ban.
 * I have personally seen that above mentioned user has been abusive to many and block logs like mediawiki block logs say it clearly.
 * It's not new to any project like wikimedia project that after reaching to some stage/position of power from where they won't be removed easily. Many tend to be dictatorial, I have been fighting with one and to tell the fact including office staff everyone is useless in our case now. Because of shitty backlash this case of Fram ban has recieved, we have lost the last chances of fetching justice for our small communities. As now onwards office has reworked their policies of intervention.
 * So all of this together, we should not unban Fram ever. in fact community needs to investigate more and give confidence to them who were forced to file a complaint anonymously. They would come in public and no such case should happen again. In other words, everyone should be able to make use of these promising structures which we showcase to tell how we are inclusive and all that shit.--QueerEcofeminist (talk) 17:20, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
 * [redacted] --- Testing this Thing   11:38, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I nowadays are no longer very active on Wikipedia and other WMF projects site to patrol the recent changes like last year or 2 years ago, due to my occupation in real-life. As I can illustrate about my point of view is Wikipedia are the worldwide encyclopedia big community project which accommodated various kind of editors, and also have a thousand kind of difference admins. Some are prejudice on Fram that familiarize about his bad civility issue very well and against on his behavior, and some are biased on the office action that implemented the ban on Fram about his long-term incivility issue and indisposed an drama on Wikipedia, this may let the arbitrators currently are incompetent to handle the Fram case. Fram has over a decade of period to serve his volunteer profession on Wikipedia, he get respected by quite a vast of veteran editors in community are not rare. I can seen that Fram didn't receive the through from T&S, hence whether Fram got harassing other users in the past ago potentially are interrogation mark, only the global authority T&S and the local authority ArbCom who knew about it. S</b>A</b> 1</b>3</b> B</b>r</b>o</b> (talk) 09:37, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * [redacted] --- Testing this Thing   11:40, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * So does the Fram has harassed you in the past ago or not? Since you had fighting with one and tell the fact to office staff. S</b>A</b> 1</b><b style="color:green">3</b><b style="color:blue"> B</b><b style="color:indigo">r</b><b style="color:violet">o</b> (talk) 11:17, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * One correction here, I did not face any direct harassment from Fram, what I said above is different, I said I have personally seen that above mentioned user has been abusive to many and block logs like mediawiki block logs say it clearly.
 * * Second thing is I did not file a complaint about fram.
 * * Third and important, because of this shitty backlash, now many users who are(on small wikis) facing similar problems because of such power freaks have no option with them, as the office has changed their policies. QueerEcofeminist (talk) 11:36, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Basically, I personally deem that Wikipedia shall be let T&S to handle and in charge of it in the future, since the community has demonstrated no competent to handle the long-term incivility behavior such as like the Fram case. I can perceive that there was quite an huge among of editors who highly hug on Fram and biased on the office action, or else it won't occurrence this sort of versus drama on Wikipedia. Wikipedia community project ambiance are quite complexity, which existent various kind of editors and admins than other projects site it is, and I can has the vouch that the T&S office staffs have some certain soreness to handle this sort of issue on Wikipedia. <b style="color:red">S</b><b style="color:orange">A</b><b style="color:gold"> 1</b><b style="color:green">3</b><b style="color:blue"> B</b><b style="color:indigo">r</b><b style="color:violet">o</b> (talk) 13:45, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * [redacted] --- Testing this Thing   14:58, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I went for some certain further look on the archives, this sock puppet user Rivselis is one of the pro-WMF in Wikipedia community who said that the T&S liability jobs are protecting the projects and all users on WMF to be safety, prevent users to get harassed and the projects to get harmed, which complied on the governmental legal constitution, that steward Ajra. on WMF and I also agree on this, Fram exactly having an long-term of problematic inflammatory behavior when I viewed on the discussion archives record. However there was an evidence case which WTT had summary out in not very long ago, hence not preclude that Fram may eventuality get the same sanctioning decision by the Arbcom in the coming event. <b style="color:red">S</b><b style="color:orange">A</b><b style="color:gold"> 1</b><b style="color:green">3</b><b style="color:blue"> B</b><b style="color:indigo">r</b><b style="color:violet">o</b> (talk) 20:40, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * [redacted] --- Testing this Thing   07:02, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Agree that steward isn't necessarily always correct, since all stewards are also a volunteer. Regarding the CU privileges, yeah they must aware that IP's data occasionally may used by other users on the same certain days of time doesn't mean that other users could be possible sock puppet, the collateral has no such of completely in accurate record, and yes this may essentially affected those new comers who joining the project. If Fram ban eventually get overturned by the ArbCom it can be said that local are incompetent, you know admins on Wikipedia community generally have the certain reputation respect than other non-admins it is, certain of them don't deem that some admins could be rogue which may misuse their power to implement an poor judgement on any tasks, and some admins could have long-term of bad civility behavior just like Fram. Note that be an admins on any projects have no such big deal, just like you, me, and other else on here. <b style="color:red">S</b><b style="color:orange">A</b><b style="color:gold"> 1</b><b style="color:green">3</b><b style="color:blue"> B</b><b style="color:indigo">r</b><b style="color:violet">o</b> (talk) 15:13, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi,

I’m friends with SA Bro 13 and I was invited to talk. First things first. I am on the side of the WMF. It is clear that they have the power to do whatever they want, since they get money and pay for the upkeep and maintenance of the server. This includes doing things for any reason, including reasons of “ I dont’ have a reason” and “ I dont lke you.” However, they follow policy as to ensure a good reason is created and followed up on.

It was clear from few interactions of Fram that I concluded he was abusive, incivil, and generally rude. I had a feeling he would eventually get himself some punishment and reprimand, and I’m glad the bna is a office block.

Much of the community members responding to WP:FRAM are utterly lacking in the grasp of the community and the role of office. This especially appears to those who diva Resigned their administrator tools over at the bureaucrat noticeboard.

As for the pending Arbcom case, its not gonna turn out much or they are gonna spin out the case as a Fram being a victim case. They were never really useful and for the most part, are there to rubber stamp the abuses of the checkuser and oversight team. And they know that office won’t do much. I know because I have personal experience with quite a few members.

That being said, the entire fiasco is a mess and the community is incompetent Artix Kreiger (talk) 18:30, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Exactly what Artix has stated was right, certain admins resigned because of this sort of Fram case, which the community have demonstrated they are incompetent to handle the long-term incivility issue of Fram case on Wikipedia. As what I has stated at above that I think Wikipedia shall be let the T&S to in charge in the future, Fram is one of the admins on Wikipedia has no such of big deal, as just like we are on here. <b style="color:red">S</b><b style="color:orange">A</b><b style="color:gold"> 1</b><b style="color:green">3</b><b style="color:blue"> B</b><b style="color:indigo">r</b><b style="color:violet">o</b> (talk) 21:55, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * [redacted] --- Testing this Thing   08:01, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Since all stewards are also elected by global community consensus so the communities are also have the various kind of stewards just like local admins, and yes I do agree that some stewards may have their egos ideological, but stewards number of people aren't that much than local admins, or have the similar among of large number of people just like local admins existent it is, so the rogue issue aren't that so grave. If ArbCom eventually make the decision ban on Fram who deem that ArbCom are the puppet of WMF, then those users who deem that are the rogue type of editors on Wikipedia. It is preferable to let office for handling the rogue abusive admins just like the Fram case, Wikipedia ambiance are complexity, it is quite difficult for me to concern the situation too explicit. <b style="color:red">S</b><b style="color:orange">A</b><b style="color:gold"> 1</b><b style="color:green">3</b><b style="color:blue"> B</b><b style="color:indigo">r</b><b style="color:violet">o</b> (talk) 21:44, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * [redacted] --- Testing this Thing   08:43, 23 August 2019 (UTC)


 * personally, I've viewed the Committee as membership of a popularity contest and bit of narcissist filled place. I suspect many of them add them to their resume. previously, DGG was the only competent or sensible member on it. Artix Kreiger (talk) 13:41, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
 * [redacted] --- Testing this Thing   16:57, 23 August 2019 (UTC)


 * ArbCom have not much difference between RFA candidate and stewards election which based on communities consensus decision to elect an various kind of arbitrators, and yes I do agree that communities have too much of admins may tendency an bureaucratic system. Wikipedia although are the big community, but not all people around the world were like to be a individual volunteer on Wikipedia, and of course it is a preferable idea to maintain the stewards in a small number of group on WMF, too much number of stewards on WMF one day may result an drama on Meta, just like what happen the Fram case had occurrence on Wikipedia. As for the Fram case on ArbCom, I expect that arbitrator may give him some certain period of Wikibreak on Wikipedia, since he has the long-term of bad civility issue. As Wikipedia ambiance are complexity, hence this sort of expectation wouldn't be too high. <b style="color:red">S</b><b style="color:orange">A</b><b style="color:gold"> 1</b><b style="color:green">3</b><b style="color:blue"> B</b><b style="color:indigo">r</b><b style="color:violet">o</b> (talk) 13:51, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
 * [redacted] --- Testing this Thing   16:57, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I am currently busy on my work and may not have much time on this certain days, give me some time to have an chats with you. :) <b style="color:red">S</b><b style="color:orange">A</b><b style="color:gold"> 1</b><b style="color:green">3</b><b style="color:blue"> B</b><b style="color:indigo">r</b><b style="color:violet">o</b> (talk) 22:47, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * [redacted] --- Testing this Thing   13:30, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

This is completely RIDICULOUS that want other to apology him! Fram incivility behavior was clear on it, and the evidence case also have the records for it. He is the one who need for apologizing to other editors that he did an personal attack toward other editors in the past ago, not other persons who need for saying sorry to Fram! It seen that Wikipedia community have been manipulated by an among of rogue editors, ArbCom practically have no very great effective to handle the long-term incivility behavior like the Fram case, because some consensus may manipulated by the bias editors opinion, so ArbCom on Wikipedia are redundant authority. My opinion is Wikipedia community shall implement the basic terms of use policy only, and the rest of elements shall be suspended. <b style="color:red">S</b><b style="color:orange">A</b><b style="color:gold"> 1</b><b style="color:green">3</b><b style="color:blue"> B</b><b style="color:indigo">r</b><b style="color:violet">o</b> (talk) 19:38, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Good-faith editors are becoming increasingly blasé to all the bastardism in the decision-making of those in power. This is not said only about the Fram saga, but also for the general habits of roguish administrators. Instead of voicing out against scoundrelism of such persons, the commoners are playing along to see what happens. You're right it's completely ridiculous but that is the status quo. People don't understand that common sense and logic should prevail over bureaucracy. W:WP:IAR exists for this reason, its main principle serves to show to people that common sense is needed. I doubt Fram would apologize to anyone after all the damage he has caused. The number of users harassed by Fram I believe exceeds ten or twenty. I agree that ArbCom isn't very effective in handling such issues, they are all regular people anyways. They are not individuals with professional or academically qualified backgrounds. Bring together a clique of friends and get them to support an action for or against another editor at w:WP:AN and there you have a binding consensus through which actioning is quasi-valid. --- Testing this Thing   11:15, 28 August 2019 (UTC)