The Signpost

File:SD Judge being weighed on scales of justice.png
JPxG
PD
News and notes

Beeblebrox ejected from Arbitration Committee following posts on Wikipediocracy

Arbitrator Beeblebrox suspended for disclosing private information off-wiki

Drawing of a judge being weighed on a scale
The English Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee has suspended one of its members
Stable Diffusion, prompt: JPxG

The Arbitration Committee, in an unprecedented move, voted on November 27 to suspend one of its members for conduct violations.

The Arbitration Committee has determined that Beeblebrox (talk · contribs) has repeatedly failed to "[p]reserve in appropriate confidence the contents of private correspondence sent to the Committee and the Committee's internal discussions and deliberations" by making disclosures on off-wiki forums. These failures followed a previous formal warning issued to Beeblebrox in September 2021 by the Arbitration Committee concerning his conduct in off-wiki forums. Therefore, in accordance with Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy § Conduct of arbitrators, Beeblebrox is suspended from Arbitration Committee membership for a period of six months from this date. During this period, Beeblebrox's CheckUser and Oversight permissions and his access to applicable mailing lists (including the functionaries' mailing list) are revoked. Following this period, Beeblebrox may request reinstatement of his permissions or mailing list access by applying to the Arbitration Committee. Beeblebrox may also regain access via election to the committee.

Support: Barkeep49, Cabayi, CaptainEek, Enterprisey, GeneralNotability, Guerillero, Izno, L235, Primefac, SilkTork, Wugapodes

Oppose:

Abstain: Moneytrees


— Special:Permalink/1188076725#Suspension_of_Beeblebrox

The resolution was nearly unanimous, with 11 arbitrators supporting and none opposing. Moneytrees, the sole abstainer, wrote, "I hold Beeblebrox in very high regard" and "thought that made me too biased to actually vote on the matter". He said to the Signpost that "some people have asked me offsite about what way I would have voted if I didn't abstain. I would like to say more but given my abstention and the private nature of the evidence (I should not confirm or deny etc), I don't think it's my place to do so at this time; maybe once the dust has settled I can give more substantive commentary".

The choice of a six-month suspension is notable, as only one month remained in Beeblebrox's term, and he had said he did not plan to run for re-election. Arbitrator Barkeep49 wrote that the committee opted for suspension rather than removal in order to provide a timeline for potential restoration of his CheckUser and Oversight permissions and mailing list access, which were removed as part of the suspension, as well as to help set a precedent for future committees.

The name of the forum where Beeblebrox made the disclosures was not disclosed in the official announcement, but it was later clarified as Wikipediocracy, a site on which Beeblebrox has been publicly and openly known to be active for some time. The site has become well-known over the years for its sometimes-trenchant criticisms of Wikipedia, as well as for more controversial activities (like doxing) that have drawn great ire from the editoriat. Arbitrator Wugapodes said, in a comment on November 29:

In discussion of the suspension, Beeblebrox commented: "Obviously, I think the committee made the wrong decision here. I'll cop to letting a small detail about something out on an external website. And when other committee members raised concerns about it, I asked for the post to be removed, and it was. And then I was told there was a 'totality of evidence' of my wrongdoing that I needed to respond to, which I feel I did, just yesterday. I guess my replies didn't cut it." When contacted by the Signpost, Beebs declined to comment further.

Most other editors in the discussion were supportive of the decision. A notable exception came from former arbitrator Worm That Turned, who wrote, "it looks like you have been taken advantage of by a troll and Beeblebrox has come out the victim." Administrator Tamzin was sharply critical of ArbCom's 2021 decision not to make the warning to Beeblebrox public, casting it as part of a pattern of "overuse of private warnings and restrictions."

As of press time, a long discussion at the talk page for the Arbitration Committee noticeboard sat at around 150,000 characters. Meanwhile, a thread on Wikipediocracy sits at 206 replies. Some over there have speculated that the forbidden posts may have included this one, something to do with formerly-GLOCKed user Gitz6666 (see previous Signpost coverage) — but it's hard to say what is fact and what is fancy.

On November 28, Beeblebrox changed his username to "Just Step Sideways" (a lyrical reference).

Editors could not recall a prior instance in which an arbitrator was removed for cause. In 2018, arbitrator Alex Shih resigned, which the committee later revealed came after he was confronted with accusations he abused the Checkuser tool and committed other confidentiality violations. In 2009, arbitrator Sam Blacketer resigned after it was revealed to ArbCom that he had used an undisclosed alternate account before joining the committee; and in 2011 Iridescent was removed for inactivity. – Sdkb, J

November's monthly average number of active admins lower than the single record low we reported in October

A black and white photograph of a foundering naval vessel
The Admin Ship is still having problems.

Update to Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2023-10-23/News and notes#Record low number of active administrators which described a "new record low" hit on 18 Oct of 448 active administrators.

Since that report we have created several new records:

  • 447 19 October
  • 444 24 October
  • 442 27 October

The number has been wobbling, but the average for the month of November was between 446 and 447. – B

Brief notes

The Wikimedia User Group Nigeria organised an online event to mark Nigeria's independence from British rule, as described in the User Group's annual report for 2022/2023.
+ Add a comment

Discuss this story

  • On the one hand, the incident raises questions about the effectiveness of Wikipedia's internal mechanisms in ensuring that ArbCom members adhere to the standards of confidentiality and integrity that their roles demand. On the other hand, the suspension of Beeblebrox underscores systemic issues that resonate with many other editors' experiences (myself included) of unfair sanction by the same committee, where the rationale for the sanction seemed obscure and possibly influenced by factors not entirely rooted in community policies and guidelines. The handling of Beeblebrox's case, especially the ambiguity surrounding their alleged misconduct, mirrors these concerns regarding the fairness and clarity of ArbCom procedures. The nature of Beeblebrox's suspension, stemming from their off-wiki activities and discussions on a forum that criticizes Wikipedia, further complicates the issue by introducing potential bias or conflict of interest. The decision to suspend them could be perceived as an attempt to silence or punish a member for participating in critical discourse about the platform, raising questions about the committee's tolerance for dissent and its capacity to remain impartial. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Normchou💬 17:27, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    None of the information revealed was critical of ArbCom at least not from my read of it. I have left a criticism of this year's committee as part of a question to every candidate running from ArbCom this year and no one has come to me with any objections. Barkeep49 (talk) 17:36, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • There's at least one more resignation in the past that was at least a little similar to the Alex Shih situation, but I suppose I'm not allowed to say anything about that either. I could have resigned and kept this quiet, but I chose not to because I felt that the committee needed to either publicly proclaim a total code of absolute silence on every single detail of every email thread, or to accept that maybe there were exceptions to this code of silence. And here we are. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 20:04, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Beebs has posted a lengthy timeline of this pathetic "issue" on Wikipediocracy, currently in the area of the site blocked from web-crawlers and accessible only to registered accounts. So register an account and read it already, don't be a baby. It makes very clear what a bunch of petty, weak, group-think-intoxicated bureaucrats have congealed on En-WP's Arbcom and how utterly baseless their argument against him is. Why anyone would reward members of this crew with re-election, such as current candidates Wugapodes and Cabayi, boggles my mind. Carrite (talk) 17:39, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Carrite Good to see we're getting into borderline-uncivil accusations of bad faith right off the bat. Good for you. Cremastra (talk) 20:09, 9 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Happy to help. Thanks for your passive-aggressive contribution to the workplace. Carrite (talk) 02:05, 10 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Vanitas vanitatum omnia vanitas. This reminded me of Cato. Anyway,

    Therefore hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it.

    — Isaiah 5:14
    ---Lemonaka‎ 11:38, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • It seems to me that when you have a 11-0 vote against you, (1) you're seriously in the wrong; or (2) the Arbcom is a totalitarian organization. I don't see much middle ground between those two explanations. Smallchief (talk) 15:12, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Commenting on something other than Beeblebrox... Is Kathy Collins' appointment the first time someone from academia has been appointed to the Board of Trustees? Might it indicate the beginnings of a shift from an emphasis on technology to one on content? (I know nothing about Collins beyond what's in the article linked.) -- llywrch (talk) 00:18, 9 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    She doesn't seem to have ever been a professor - her positions in academia have all been "VP for Finance" and she previously worked for the United States Department of Transportation and the Office of Management and Budget. Not that any of that is "bad" experience, just not the sort that's going to lend itself to a focus on content. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 12:39, 11 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Oh well. One can always hope that someone outside of the STEM environment might be appointed to the Foundation Board, thus giving the humanities some influence on the projects. -- llywrch (talk) 22:23, 29 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • What Smallchief said. If there were serious doubt here, it wouldn't have been 11-0. ArbCom has enough problems agreeing with each other on other issues, but this one got them all in agreement, which in itself is noteworthy on such a controversial matter. --Elonka 00:26, 11 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]