X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Mon Jun 29 20:38:34 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
Message-ID: <4A490AA0.4010107@post.pl>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 14:40:32 -0400
From: Piotr Konieczny <piokon@post.pl>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
	rv:1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090303 MultiZilla/1.8.3.4e SeaMonkey/1.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
References: <25890ca0906281732s3836a51i757b5568dd328d63@mail.gmail.com>	<4f045a880906281902n56be257ao44cc951550f8b1e9@mail.gmail.com>	<c3b2b3db0906282003j163060b5y8ba6da454b967828@mail.gmail.com>	<c3b2b3db0906282012r23dcb4fcr3982e02029734d66@mail.gmail.com>	<25890ca0906290536t1e1014c7t5915ae76f3772d56@mail.gmail.com>	<c3b2b3db0906290548w37de1fa2w2e2e0c4fc73e48d@mail.gmail.com>	<25890ca0906290557v54ca84ffw6fd1bfa41726da34@mail.gmail.com>
	<25890ca0906290607n3820f96ledc8b75892a474f3@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <25890ca0906290607n3820f96ledc8b75892a474f3@mail.gmail.com>
X-Spam_score: -2.4
X-Spam_score_int: -23
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software,
	running on the system "pakkun.mirky.net", has
	identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
	has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or
	label similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
	the administrator of that system for details.
	Content preview:  radek szulga wrote: > Also, it would be useful if
	someone could elaborate/explain this > portion of the AE guideline: > >
	"# In November 2008, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion which >
	stated that administrators are prohibited from reversing or >
	overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another >
	administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, >
	and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except > > *
	with the written authorization of the Committee, or > * following a
	clear, substantial, and active community consensus to do so. > >
	Provisionally (pending updates to the enforcement process), this >
	applies only to specific administrative actions affecting specific >
	users; it does not apply to notices, editor lists, warnings, broad >
	topic area actions, or other "enforcement actions" that are not >
	specific actions applied to specific editors. (Clarification motion)" >
	> Obviously there is NOT going to be a "clear community consensus".
	Does
	> this mean that Thatcher is the only person who can rescind the
	ruling?
	> If so, then perhaps it would be better to go straight to RFAR? [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-2.4 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ----------------------
	--------------------------------------------------
	0.1 FORGED_RCVD_HELO       Received: contains a forged HELO
	-2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	0.1 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7-deb (2006-10-05) on 
	pakkun.mirky.net
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	FORGED_RCVD_HELO autolearn=unavailable version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: Re: [WPM] Appeal at AE (was: Let's give Thatcher some
	breathing	space)
X-BeenThere: folks@wikipedometer.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
List-Id: Wikipedia statistics <folks.wikipedometer.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks>,
	<mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:folks@wikipedometer.net>
List-Help: <mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks>,
	<mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: -2.4
X-Spam_score_int: -23
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "pakkun.mirky.net", has
	identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
	has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
	similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
	the administrator of that system for details.
	Content preview:  radek szulga wrote: > Also, it would be useful if
	someone could elaborate/explain this > portion of the AE guideline: > >
	"# In November 2008, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion which >
	stated that administrators are prohibited from reversing or >
	overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another >
	administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, >
	and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except > > *
	with the written authorization of the Committee, or > * following a
	clear, substantial, and active community consensus to do so. > >
	Provisionally (pending updates to the enforcement process), this >
	applies only to specific administrative actions affecting specific >
	users; it does not apply to notices, editor lists, warnings, broad >
	topic area actions, or other "enforcement actions" that are not >
	specific actions applied to specific editors. (Clarification motion)" >
	> Obviously there is NOT going to be a "clear community consensus". Does
	> this mean that Thatcher is the only person who can rescind the ruling?
	> If so, then perhaps it would be better to go straight to RFAR? [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-2.4 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
	0.1 FORGED_RCVD_HELO       Received: contains a forged HELO
	-2.6 BAYES_00               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	0.1 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

radek szulga wrote:
> Also, it would be useful if someone could elaborate/explain this
> portion of the AE guideline:
> 
> "# In November 2008, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion which
> stated that administrators are prohibited from reversing or
> overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another
> administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy,
> and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except
> 
>     * with the written authorization of the Committee, or
>     * following a clear, substantial, and active community consensus to do so.
> 
> Provisionally (pending updates to the enforcement process), this
> applies only to specific administrative actions affecting specific
> users; it does not apply to notices, editor lists, warnings, broad
> topic area actions, or other "enforcement actions" that are not
> specific actions applied to specific editors. (Clarification motion)"
> 
> Obviously there is NOT going to be a "clear community consensus". Does
> this mean that Thatcher is the only person who can rescind the ruling?
> If so, then perhaps it would be better to go straight to RFAR?

Wikilawyering :) Hope she forgets about this or that it is not 
mentioned. If it is, go to RFAR, but there is no reason not to try AE first.


-- 
Piotr Konieczny

"The problem about Wikipedia is, that it just works in reality, not in 
theory."

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia statistics discussion list
folks@wikipedometer.net
http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks

