Hi,

My opinion is that the block should be lifted. However, to the best of my
knowledge, an appeal of a local block to the larger Wikiverse has never
been successful. I am guessing that there are at least four factors here:
1. a lack of consensus for a process for appealing a local block to the
larger community, or whether such a process is desirable, 2. a lack of
skilled community human resources capacity to review such appeals (I would
guess that reviewers of appeals would get flooded with hundreds of
low-value appeals, that the job would be emotionally and intellectually
difficult, and that the queue for reviews would be many months long), 3. a
lack of confidence among people who are not proficient in a language to
review a dispute that happened in that language, and 4. a lack of volunteer
capacity and financial resources for highly accurate translations of
appeals and their related content.

Asking WMF to overturn a community block sets a precedent for them to
substitute their judgement for the community's. There is a history of
problems with WMF clashing with the community, and I have an ongoing
objection to WMF's unilateral and opaque uses of global blocks. I would not
want WMF to forcibly intervene in matters like this. Instead, What I
recommend is diplomacy. The admin who made the block appears to have
intermediate proficiency in English. I recommend first having a diplomatic
discussion with that admin regarding the block. The admin could be
persuaded to remove it. By "diplomatic discussion" I do not mean telling
the admin bluntly that "you are wrong and I am right". An assumption of
good faith, persuasion, and respect are likely to be valuable here. Try
diplomacy first.

If the admin remains unpersuaded to unblock the user then, to the best of
my knowledge, the only routes of appeal available are on that wiki. I am
unfamiliar with the specific situation in Armenian Wikipedia, but I suggest
looking for a local policy for appealing blocks and looking for a username
policy. Intermediate proficiency in Armenian is likely to be highly
desirable, and likely necessary, for productive conversations on that wiki
regarding a block appeal and/or proposing a change in local username policy.

I realize that the concept of appealing a local block to the global
community sounds like it is worth considering, but even if in principle
there becomes a consensus that we should allow this, implementing such an
option for appeals would likely be difficult and time consuming in
practice, and without highly accurate translations which we do not appear
to have sufficient volunteer or financial resources to support at this
time, I think that the potential for mistakes due to misunderstandings is
high.

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to
https://www.mail-archive.com/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/msg31408.html
www.mail-archive.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2022-40
12189
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:XRZDTA57JWX6S3F577XXWV3KVRNEFSE4
<urn:uuid:c8f3f654-be03-474a-b099-e8c5c51f707f>
2022-10-06T21:01:49Z
72.52.77.8
text/html
sha1:TMORQBW4CL44VG42KBM4WCBEYQ5IKOV5
<urn:uuid:512dfd4b-cc85-40c9-9a9c-f3d84b058204>
https://www.mail-archive.com/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/msg31408.html
response
<urn:uuid:e5335d16-7b5f-4a7a-9a18-de0c205d86b9>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2022-40
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for September/October 2022
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-230
software: Apache Nutch 1.19 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.4-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/