User talk:L235

3rd amendment

Hi Kevin! Hope you're doing well, all things considered. I've been working on Engblom v. Carey—one of the only federal 3rd amendment cases—and thought you might be interested in helping out. There's been a renewed interest in the 3rd amendment recently (it went from 200 to 10k hits overnight last week), and it's a rare case which might be fun to get to FA. Let me know if you're interested, but I completely understand if you're too busy though! Hopefully things will be more stable by the fall and you're keeping safe. — Wug·a·po·des​ 06:20, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

@Wugapodes: Hey, it's terrific to hear from you! I am actually traveling right now, which as you might imagine is a somewhat difficult task at the moment. Give me a week, though, and I'll look it over – it'd be really fun to work with you Kevin (alt of L235 · t · c) 15:53, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Totally understand. My lease is up in a month, so I'm dreading having to move all my stuff in the current environment. Feel free to help when you can, if anything a fresh pair of eyes would be useful for making sure it's on the right track. Safe travels! — Wug·a·po·des​ 19:31, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Wugapodes, if you're willing to have me along, I'd be interested in helping - I was actually just reading that article the other day while trying to explain Incorporation of the Bill of Rights to some friends. creffett (talk) 16:09, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

@Creffett: Of course! All help is appreciated. — Wug·a·po·des​ 19:31, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

The assembling of the stuffy arbs. Natureium (talk) 20:22, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 July 2021

• News and notes: Wikimania and a million other news stories

• Special report: Hardball in Hong Kong

• In the media: Larry is at it again

• Board of Trustees candidates: See the candidates

• Recent research: Gender bias and statistical fallacies, disinformation and mutual intelligibility

• Traffic report: Football, tennis and marveling at Loki

• News from the WMF: Uncapping our growth potential – interview with James Baldwin, Finance and Administration Department

• Humour: A little verse

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Merchandise Giveaway Nomination

Just to let you know, I've nominated you for a T-Shirt over at meta:Merchandise giveaways/Nominations/L235. Happy editing, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 08:16, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Didn't realise that you had already got a t-shirt (didn't account for an old username), so I've withdrawn it. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 22:12, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

My AE

Hi Kevin, it was me that reached out to Jackson on Twitter to write this article [1]. I did tell him to reach out to the Arbitration Committee for comment and I very much agree with your comments, which are very pertinent to my current situation. I did also tell him to reach out to our colleagues Alexbrn and RandomCanadian who have been very much against us having the COVID-19 lab leak page, but they didn’t offer any comments. Now I am facing some very serious charges in an AE [2] and I am getting mixed messages from admins about the due date for my statement, so I would very much appreciate it if you or any other member of ArbCom could make a clarifying statement in this regard. I am also very much concerned about the integrity of the process and I am especially concerned that the proposed closer seems to have already ruled out a WP:BOOMERANG [3], even though a number of editors have pointed out that the OP made the same apparent mistake I did. Can you advise how I can make this a full ArbCom case to assure I have a fair hearing? CutePeach (talk) 04:07, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@CutePeach: Thanks for your note. Regarding the AE thread, I'm not involved in this issue and have no intention of becoming involved. A cursory review indicates that an administrator has requested your comment; it is in your best interest to respond quickly.

As for full ArbCom review, if the AE thread is closed with arbitration enforcement action taken against you, you have the option of appealing to the Arbitration Committee by filing a request at WP:ARCA; this option is detailed in Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures § Standard provision: appeals and modifications (point #3). Be advised, however, that successful ARCA appeals are exceedingly rare (I can recall fewer than one per year since 2015), and the full Committee generally only reverses arbitration enforcement actions in exceptional circumstances (e.g. an abuse of administrative discretion). Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 06:33, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Just as a general point, since I've discussed this topic before offwiki, don't you think what you describe is ArbCom abandoning its duties? Some arbs said they consider AE as "community control" which is why they don't like to overturn AE actions, but I don't see how that's the case at all. The community regularly elects 15 admins solely for the purpose of conduct resolution by fiat. Normally, a majority of those 15 arbs voting in favour would be required to enact the exact same sanction. But ArbCom offshores that responsibility to admins, who are users with lifetime terms not specifically elected for the purpose of reviewing conduct issues, who can take decisions unilaterally and most AEs will have 1-2 admins reviewing at best, and even the most popular AEs will have less than 15 reviewing. Those admins make bans under ArbCom's banning power, not under any community authorisation.

So, really, shouldn't ArbCom as a full Committee of 15 be obliged to consider substantively any bans made under its name, if appealed? Given that you're the only users who the community elects to decide by fiat, and you're the only users who are accountable to the community for their actions (through re-election). ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 12:45, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

No, I don't think so. ArbCom does not have the capacity to review all AE appeals de novo; doing so would open the floodgates for every dissatisfied user to appeal at ArbCom. AE works because admins can trust that their decisions will not be reversed by their colleagues or by ArbCom without good reason; it's centered around giving administrative discretion some level of finality, and allowing de novo appeals to ArbCom would defeat that. KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 16:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

I feel I must agree with Proc here. Surely the floodgates must not be opened, but there are relatively few cases like this one, where while there may be majority support for DS action, there is unlikely to be true consensus (unless CutePeach's statement demonstrates that action is clearly necessary; I also must repeat that CutePeach's statement should be made as soon as possible -- I am not sure why CutePeach chose to make a statement here in lieu of one at AE). My understanding is that the ARBCOM of ten years ago would have already had a "COVID lab leak editors" case, assessing the behavior of even three editors in the area does not seem like an unreasonable burden. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 02:27, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Kevin, the problem - as I’ve said in the AE - is that I’m extremely busy at work, and I would have to take the day off tomorrow in order to make the new 48 hour deadline imposed by ‎In actu, so it would appreciate if someone on the ArbCom like you or HighinBC could clarify this matter. Four admins admins including ToBeFree, El_C, wbm1058 and DGG have acknowledged my request for more time, so this is really very confusing. Do you think I should just provide my statement after the judgement is made, since it seems to be premeditated anyway? CutePeach (talk) 15:31, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@CutePeach: You don't need to provide Atlas Shrugged, just a statement. The length of your first post to Kevin (200-ish words), above, would be more than sufficient. --In actu (Guerillero) ^{Parlez Moi} 15:41, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @CutePeach: you should definitely aim to provide your statement before the complaint is closed. Again, I'm fine with a week or two extension, myself, but if others are not as lax (especially in light of the bad look of you having done other wiki-stuff while that time extension request was pending), then it is what it is. Ultimately, I think it'd be a bit silly of you to not attempt to mount a robust defense just because it's looking grim right now. El_C 15:44, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@CutePeach:, thisi s critical. You don't have to convince the people you've already convinced, you have to convince the skeptical. It might be possible to challenge a close on the basis of personal bias, but that tends to be a difficult and very unpleasant procedure that is best avoided. DGG ( talk ) 21:51, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@DGG: unfortunately, there aren’t any sceptical people to convince. I am already condemned and tonight at midnight, In actu will put his noose around my neck and hang me from his Wiki gallows. Kevin here has said a successful appeal is exceedingly rare, so I have resigned myself to my fate. I am a 36 year old primigravida and this isn’t good for my health. I will post my statement to my sandbox later, but I will not dignify the AE with my presence. Most of the admins there are either involved in the topic or canvassed by editors. ToBeFree - who ignored my original complaint [4] - made a presumption of guilt from the start, and raised the word limit from 500 to 1500 to accommodate for Shibbolethink’s spaghetti flinging - and he is using nearly 1200 words himself! I knew it was over when I saw HighInBC’s first comment [5], and here he says again that I am highly likely to be banned [6], before even hearing my statement. I think they just want my statement to give the appearance of due process and fairness. My hopes went up when I saw CaptainEek join without making judgment, but then he called me out for canvassing two editors who also suffered WP:CRYNPA from Shibbolethink, and he didn’t say anything about Shibbolethink canvassing PaleoNeonate on my own wall [7], with support from ToBeFree [8]. Then El_C, who has called me a sock [9] joins in, followed by Bishonen, who has referred to me as bastard [10], and semi active Hut 8.5 who made this statement [11]. Finally, semi-active Johnuniq joins in too, reminding me of this statement they made [12]. I wonder if they have their own Twitch channel. CutePeach (talk) 23:41, 29 July 2021 (UTC)