User:QuackGuru/Sand 28
The Fram controversy involved the Wikimedia Foundation banning the English Wikipedia administrator Fram on June 10, 2019 from editing the English Wikipedia for one year, consistent with the Terms of Use.[1] This was the first ever temporary partial ban implemented by the Wikimedia Foundation's Trust and Safety division.[1] The Wikimedia Foundation stated that Fram was banned in order to uphold "respect and civility" on the site.[1] The Fram ban raised issues about constitutional order and project governance within the community.[2]
The reaction from the Wikipedia community was swift and intense.[1] There were Wikipedia administrators and editors who left in protest and contributors had contemplated a strike on developing the encyclopedia until the ban is overturned.[2] A letter from the Arbitration Committee stated in part: "If Fram's ban—an unappealable sanction issued from above with no community consultation—represents the WMF's new strategy for dealing with harassment on the English Wikipedia, it is one that is fundamentally misaligned with the Wikimedia movement's principles of openness, consensus, and self-governance."[2]
Background
Fram started editing Wikipedia in 2005 and was appointed as a Wikipedia administrator in 2007.[2] Fram has been a very productive editor with over 200,000 edits.[2]
Fram had been known for strictly enforcing editing policies such as copyright infringements, and on occasion for being disrespectful toward others on Wikipedia.[2] No less than 11 Wikipedians claimed that Fram harassed them or someone else on Wikipedia, according to a The Signpost article written by Wikipedia editor Smallbones.[2] The article was deleted by a Wikipedian due to concerns that it breached Wikipedia's rule on content on living persons.[2]
Fram was cautioned at least twice by e-mail from the Wikimedia Foundation's Trust and Safety division regarding his behavior.[2] On May 4, 2019, Fram told to the Arbitration Committee in part to "crawl into a corner and shut up" or "collectively resign."[2]
Since 2012, Wikimedia Foundation's Trust and Safety division has implemented 32 permanent global bans.[1] However, this was the first ever temporary partial ban.[1] Fram was not banned from editing Wikimedia Commons.[1] Historically, the Wikimedia Foundation has not interfered with the people who use and edit Wikipedia.[1] Disciplinary action against misbehavior on the English Wikipedia are usually decided and dealt with by the editorial community as well as by the Arbitration Committee, the 15-editor group appointed by editors within the community.[1]
Overview
On June 10, 2019, the Wikimedia Foundation banned the English Wikipedia administrator Fram from editing the English Wikipedia for one year.[1] Later on that same day, the Wikimedia Foundation described that the ban had stemmed from complaints from Wikipedia editors.[1] The Wikimedia Foundation stated to BuzzFeed News that Fram was banned in order to uphold "respect and civility" on the site.[1] They also stated "Uncivil behavior, including harassment, threats, stalking, spamming, or vandalism, is against our Terms of Use, which are applicable to anyone who edits on our projects."[1] The Wikimedia Foundation’s Trust and Safety division stated, "local communities consistently struggle to uphold not just their own autonomous rules but the Terms of Use."[2] This suggests that one of the reasons the Wikimedia Foundation thought it was necessary to take action was because the Arbitration Committee had not taken action.[2]
The following day after the ban on June 11, 2019, Fram stated on his Wikimedia Commons page that he had been given two prior "conduct warnings" from the Wikimedia Foundation's Trust and Safety division for his rude behavior toward other editors on Wikipedia.[1] He also stated that the Wikimedia Foundation told him that the reason for banning him stems from a single comment to the Arbitration Committee, stating "Fuck Arbcom."[1] Fram wrote, once he had been cautioned of his conduct any "flimsy justification" would result in a ban.[1] "I'm not a model admin or editor." … "But I believe I was steadily improving. But that's not for [English-language Wikipedia] to decide apparently," Fram stated.[1] Fram stated he was actually banned because of his history of disputes with the Wikimedia Foundation regarding the specifics of software upgrades to the site.[1] Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales pleaded with the Wikipedia community to avoid doing anything hasty.[1]
According to BuzzFeed News, there was no trial.[1] In accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's own safety code, they do not "disclose the complainer nor the complaint."[1] The Wikipedia administrator Floquenbeam unblocked Fram, stating "I believed the unblock was necessary to force the WMF to take that overwhelming community support for an unblock seriously," in an email to BuzzFeed News.[1] On June 12, 2019 the Wikimedia Foundation blocked Fram again, and rescinded Floquenbeam's status as an administrator for a month for overturning its decision.[1] That same day, the Wikipedia administrator Bishonen unblocked Fram, arguing that the Wikimedia Foundation began a wheel war, which involves at least one administrator's action is reversed by another administrator.[1]
Timeline
| As of | Timeline of events |
|---|---|
| 2005 | Fram started contributing to Wikipedia.[2] |
| 2007 | Fram was given administrator rights.[2] |
| June 10, 2019 | On this date, the Wikimedia Foundation banned the Wikipedia administrator Fram from editing the English Wikipedia for one year.[1] |
| June 27, 2019 | Following the ban of Fram, nine English Wikipedia administrators had resigned.[1] |
| July 2, 2019 | Following the ban of Fram, 21 English Wikipedia administrators had resigned.[2] |
| July 2, 2019 | One bot was deactivated by the editor who operated it.[2] |
| June 21, 2019 | A formal statement from the Wikimedia Foundation Board was assured by Jimmy Wales.[1] |
| June 27, 2019 | No formal statement from the Wikimedia Foundation Board had been made.[1] |
| June 30, 2019 | On this date, the Wikimedia District of Columbia chapter stated in part:
"We believe there are circumstances where the Wikimedia Foundation should take action against individual editors who violate the Terms of Use when it is necessary to protect people of all backgrounds and gender identities."[1] |
Constitutional crisis
The two fundamental themes inciting the discussion are as follows: How ought the Wikimedia movement handle matters of harassment and to what extent is the English Wikipedia community autonomous?[2] As a consequence, the discussion surrounding the Fram situation has led to a constitutional crisis.[2] The underlining question brought up by the ban has to do with why the Arbitration Committee and the Wikipedia community had not addressed the Fram situation.[1] Enforcement of the Terms of Use by the Wikipedia Foundation's office action, initially resulted in more questions being asked than there were answers.[1] Editors within the community stated that the Wikipedia Foundation's Trust and Safety division has from time to time forwarded complaints to the Arbitration Committee.[1] The Wikipedia Foundation stated to the Wikipedia community that it could not forward the complaints to the Arbitration Committee in this particular situation because of "privacy provisions," and that Fram commented to the Arbitration Committee "Fuck ArbCom," lending to "the appearance of a conflict of interest."[1]
Sites such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube generally use a top-down model for rules governing content.[2] However, contributors to Wikipedia have long thought it is best to decide for themselves what constitutes incivility.[2] If the Wikimedia Foundation controlled Wikipedia like other sites controlled their contributors, it would dismantle the encyclopedia, is an area of concern.[2] Jimmy Wales stated, "This is not about individual people, this is a question about our constitutional order. This is not about this specific situation, but a much more important and broader question about project governance."[2] An experienced Wikipedian stated to Slate's Stephen Harrison, "It's been tradition that our communities are by and large self-governing, except for issues around child protection, threats of suicide, threats of violence, and legal matters."[2] Considering that these four classifications are not related to the Fram situation, many within the community believed that the Wikimedia Foundation overstepped its authority.[2]
Reaction
Wikipedia community
The reaction from the Wikipedia community was swift and intense.[1] Within an hour following the ban, Wikipedia administrators had posted dozens of comments on their noticeboard asking for an explanation.[1] There were editors in the Wikipedia community that expressed anger at the Wikimedia Foundation for not providing specifics and believed that Fram was not worthy of being banned.[1] The Wikipedia community was angered at the lack of details from the Wikipedia Foundation and was certain that Fram was not deserving of the ban.[1] Outrage in the Wikipedia community continued two weeks following the ban.[1] There were Wikipedia administrators and editors who left in protest and contributors had contemplated a strike on developing the encyclopedia until the ban is overturned.[2]
The Wikipedia administrator Risker was worried that the Wikimedia Foundation did a spectacular and unprecedented move without discussing it in a customary manner.[1] "It comes across as a FUD [fear, uncertainty, and doubt] campaign: we'll temporarily ban people who did something wrong according to rules we haven't shared, but we won't tell you what they did, what can be done to prevent similar actions, or whether we'll change the [unshared] rules again without telling you. This is why even people who don't like Fram, and even those who think Fram was behaving unacceptably, are having a hard time with this ban. Bluntly put, I feel much less safe working on a Wikimedia project today than I did a week ago, because one of the most fundamental understandings I had about working here has now been proven wrong," Risker wrote, in June 2019.[1]
The intense reaction to the banning of Fram from the Wikipedia community is partly due to Wikipedia started prior the Wikimedia Foundation as well as the community has previously upheld a firm self-governing existence.[2] Many within the community stated that the outcome for Fram should be determined by the consensus among editors rather than by Wikipedia's office action.[2] A letter from the Arbitration Committee stated in part: "If Fram's ban—an unappealable sanction issued from above with no community consultation—represents the WMF's new strategy for dealing with harassment on the English Wikipedia, it is one that is fundamentally misaligned with the Wikimedia movement's principles of openness, consensus, and self-governance."[2]
Wikipedia commenters
— Joseph Bernstein, BuzzFeed News[1]
On June 11, 2019, ReclaimTheNet's Didi Rankovic stated, "Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee (ArbCom) was so short on details that it prompted accusations of a lack of transparency. A serious accusation, in fact, given the proclaimed nature of the organization, and the expectation of its many contributors."[3]
On June 27, 2019, BuzzFeed News's Joseph Bernstein stated, "Unmotivated by profit and maintained by a volunteer army of idealists, Wikipedia has so far escaped the fate of the other user-generated content giants, now locked in public, years-long, brutally specific battles over content policies and moderation. But now, with one decision, the Wikimedia Foundation seemed to have plunged the project into the familiar world of strikes and suspensions, martyrdom and harassment. It finds itself in the painful position that the YouTubes and Twitters of the world have been unable to escape: in open conflict with some of its most devoted users, without whom its scale and success would be unimaginable, but whose sometimes toxic culture threatens its long-term health."[1]
On July 2, 2019, Slate's Stephen Harrison stated, "Search Wikipedia for WP:FRAM, a shortcut to the project namespace that exists behind the encyclopedia articles, and you’ll find a discussion about Fram’s ban that is now more than 470,000 words—longer than the novel A Game of Thrones."[2]
References
- ↑ 1.00 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.08 1.09 1.10 1.11 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.16 1.17 1.18 1.19 1.20 1.21 1.22 1.23 1.24 1.25 1.26 1.27 1.28 1.29 1.30 1.31 1.32 1.33 1.34 1.35 1.36 1.37 1.38 1.39 1.40 1.41 Bernstein, Joseph (June 27, 2019). "The Culture War Has Finally Come For Wikipedia". BuzzFeed News.
- ↑ 2.00 2.01 2.02 2.03 2.04 2.05 2.06 2.07 2.08 2.09 2.10 2.11 2.12 2.13 2.14 2.15 2.16 2.17 2.18 2.19 2.20 2.21 2.22 2.23 2.24 2.25 2.26 2.27 2.28 Harrison, Stephen (July 2, 2019). "Wikipedia's "Constitutional Crisis" Pits Community Against Foundation". Slate.
- ↑ Rankovic, Didi (June 11, 2019). "Wikipedia administrator and editor has been banned from Wikipedia amongst criticism of the foundation". ReclaimTheNet.
External links
- "Fram's English Wikipedia user page on June 10, 2019". June 10, 2019.
