LOLEdit

Such a ban receives review from multiple people, including both members of the T&S and Legal teams before going into effect. - We have heard these precise lines from your fellow comrade, Jan in the course of FRAMGATE. Sadly, ...... Winged Blades of Godric (talk) 15:22, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Would you be happier if they had individual discretion? In this aspect, I think it's as good as it can reasonably get. Vermont (talk) 03:51, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
I'll ping Winged Blades of Godric,Vermont, Seraphimblade and EddieHugh as presumably interested participants of this discussion.
Prior to the closure several editors (including myself) attempted to raise concerns on Kbrown's talk page regarding the content of the proposed close, but KBrown went unresponsive. In a nutshell I noted the Board of Trustees statement that T&S focus on the most severe cases, for instance: the handling of legal issues, threats of violence, cross-wiki abuse, and child protection issues until consultation and agreement between T&S and the community are achieved. I noted that if the Foundation's proposed resolution were not adequate it could lead to a community consensus declaring "no agreement had been achieved", leaving that board statement in place and active. After reading the close, I am optimistic that the concerns may be resolved with minor clarification.
Samuel (WMF), the consultation was a mess because T&S incorrectly defined the issue as Temporary&Partial-ban-policy. The close largely suffers from the same problem. No one particularly cared that the Foundation added lighter sanction options. The new Temporary&Partial ban policy was incidental to the real issue. The issue was that T&S expanded scope of cases were it was getting involved, regardless of the type of sanction. The close is, at best, murky in addressing the real issue. However I'm cautiously optimistic that some minor clarification can resolve the concerns. It would help if the close were more clear that T&S understands why the community reacted so strongly, and more clear whether the scope-of-cases issue has been genuinely been resolved.
To quote English Wikipedia's policy section Harassment#What harassment is not: there is an endemic problem on Wikipedia of giving "harassment" a much broader and inaccurate meaning. T&S stomped on Not-Harassment policy. Building an encyclopedia inherently involves critiquing each other's work. It also involves tracking the content produced by an individual, to find and address any pattern of problems in their editing. Relevant criticism is not harassment, tracking a user with a pattern of problems is not harassment. Users with persistent content problems will often claim "harassment" when they are repeatedly or harshly criticized.
The Framban issue is that the Foundation is not supposed to get involved in content decisions, not supposed to get involved in judging critique of content, nor the tracking and cleanup of content deemed problematical by the community. Fram's criticism was at times unbecomingly-harsh for an Administrator. However Fram was doing fundamentally valid work tracking, criticizing, and cleaning up content problems. That is not harassment, that is not a threat, that is not a safety issue, T&S should not have touched the case.
The close says The threshold for a Foundation global ban is much higher than the threshold for a partial or temporary ban... the issues that tend to lead to traditional Foundation global bans are not issues that would have resulted in a temporary or partial ban to begin with. While that is promising, it doesn't actually say anything in particular. It doesn't show that T&S really understand what the problem was, and it doesn't really indicate that the problem has been resolved. Alsee (talk) 11:57, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Access to nonpublic personal data policy/NoticeboardEdit

Hi Samuel! I recently signed the confidentiality agreement and was just curious when I might be listed on the noticeboard? Thanks Etothepi (talk) 17:01, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello Etothepi, sorry for the delay. The Noticeboard has just been updated: Special:Diff/19647048. Cheers —Samuel (WMF) (talk) 14:18, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Thanks a million! Etothepi (talk) 17:26, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

ANIPEdit

Hi Samuel, you just added Maxim and SoWhy to the list - can you please add me too? I signed on Friday. Thank you. – bradv🍁 16:06, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello Bradv, my apologies for the delay. I've just added your username: Special:Diff/19647048. Cheers —Samuel (WMF) (talk) 14:19, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Thank you! – bradv🍁 14:20, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Log InEdit

Hi User:Samuel (WMF). 2 years of Wikipedia access restrictions were lifted in Turkey on 15 January. After this news, I wanted to log into my account. However, I couldn't log in for more than 2 years and I forgot the email address and password. I talked to Administrator User:Vikiçizer, Bureaucrat User:Xeno and Steward User:HakanIst about this. If I learn my e-mail address, I can set a new password. I can learn my e-mail only from someone who can access the database. Can you help me? User:Abecesel.

Hey Abecesel, my apologies for the long delay, I missed your ping. My understanding is that you would like to request that another account's password be reset. If so, could you kindly drop your request at ca wikimedia.org? Samuel (WMF) (talk) 13:21, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Can you checkEdit

Hi, could you check if he succeed to sign the agreements? Thanks, Stryn (talk) 16:53, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Hey Stryn, his signature was just added to the Noticeboard: Special:Diff/19794937. Best regards, Samuel (WMF) (talk) 13:18, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Access to nonpublic personal data policy/NoticeboardEdit

Hi Samuel,

I signed the agreement so I could re-gain access to ACC... could you pop me on the list so this can be completed? - RichT|C|E-Mail 21:30, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Hey @Rich Smith:, this is now done, as per Special:Diff/19966411. Samuel (WMF) (talk) 14:50, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
Appreciated, thanks Samuel - RichT|C|E-Mail 14:53, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

nullification of NDA signatureEdit

Is it intended to be appealable? --GZWDer (talk) 22:32, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@WMFOffice: You have updated it, but this still does not indicate whether it is appealable.--GZWDer (talk) 21:45, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

smartphone editing workshop invitationEdit

Greetings Samuel,

We hope this finds you well! The Black Lunch Table project would like to invite you to share your work with Wikipedia on a smartphone with our online community.

As editors we are acutely aware of the challenges faced by editors who don’t have reliable access to wifi or laptops and how this is compounded in a moment where everything is going online. We are inspired to consider that this moment provides an opportunity to share strategies for engaging communities in Wikipedia editing and the broader discussion of who writes history.

Black Lunch Table has always been about both in-person and digital collectivities and within this current moment will be even more digital. As artists, we are thinking about creative solutions to operating within these new constraints and are mindful of the many changes [ethical, ideological, practical, financial…] bound up in this online shift. We are hopeful that our adapted approach to operating within these spaces will remain flexible, generative, and affirming.

Your presentation + workshop would be part of a larger series of workshops, artist talks, and online edit a thons we are hosting from now through August.

Date: June 14th at 11am CT

Location: bit.ly/blacklunchtablemeet

Deliverables: best practices for editing Wiki on a smartphone or ipad; engaging with attendees to co-lead workshop with BLT team

If this seems like an adventure you can join us on, please respond by email before May 26th and we will respond with instructions and a note of agreement.

We look forward to talking with you and wish you well.

Jina Valentine + Heather Hart + the BLT Team Fishantena (talk) 16:25, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Users Confientiality AgreementEdit

I had signed the OTRS Users Confientiality Agreement. Could you help add my name here?--May♡♡→♡℃Talk 08:27, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @蟲蟲飛: you had signed OTRS users confientiality agreement that could updated by OTRS admins on noticeboard tracking agreements on the OTRS wiki (private). Samuel could update noticeboard on meta for general confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information (for non-OTRS related access to nonpublic information) if you signed. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 14:06, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Mass messagesEdit

Hello! Today you have sent in the Russian section more than 1000 notifications about messages sent by mail. Please don't do this anymore - it is perceived by Wikipedia contributors as spam. It is better to make notifications on the forums (ru:ВП:Ф-Н or ru:ВП:Ф-О), then participants, who are interested in this topic, will see and respond it, and uninterested ones will not be disturbed. Всеслав Чародей (talk) 18:40, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Всеслав Чародей, many thanks for writing here. I am truly sorry for these massive pings. Moving forward, we are considering using e-mails instead of on-wiki messages like those your community received. This is why, for this time at least, we had to make sure people got the notifications. Please, rest assured that your advice to use the forums in the future is well noted. Send my regards and sincere apologies to the communities for the disturbance. Many thanks for your time and understanding. Best, Samuel (WMF) (talk) 19:04, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for clarifying! Всеслав Чародей (talk) 19:07, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

MassMessaging for annual surveyEdit

Hello, Samuel. You placed a reminder message on my talk page at fywiki about the Community Insights Survey. I did indeed receive the e-mail, but I didn't forget or overlook it. I decided not to answer it. Since a few years I have a policy of not clicking on any buttons in e-mails anymore, as that can lead huge problems. You just can't rely on it that the link will take you where the people sending the e-mail tell you it will take you. I'm talking about phishing mails, which often are indistinguishable from the real thing. I do not know who you are if you contact me like this outside of Wikipedia. I mean, anyone can say they are (in this case) Rebecca Maung, Wikimedia Foundation. I don't know this person from a hole in the ground, and who is to say that if there is such a person, she's the one who send the e-mail? It's sad, but I don't trust anyone anymore. So if you want me to respond to the survey you will have to type out the link in full, so that I can see where it will take me and determine if it is to be trusted, after which I can copy and paste it in my browser. Greetings, Ieneach fan 'e Esk (talk) 20:00, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Ieneach fan 'e Esk, thanks for stopping by here and leaving me a note. Your point it totally understandable as phishing is a widespread practice. I appreciate the time you took to explain this. Your feedback is greatly helpful and we will take it into consideration. Stay safe, Samuel (WMF) (talk) 10:42, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I didn't receive it. Best regards. A.WagnerC (talk) 19:44, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
@A.WagnerC: I'm happy to resend the email, if you would like! Best, RMaung (WMF) (talk) 17:59, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi, @Samuel (WMF):. You received several replies to your "heads-up" at Meta:Babel#Heads-up about MassMessaging for annual survey. Maybe you'd like to respond? My impression of the consensus there is that the emails really were spam, and that talk page messages are better. Mind you, I wouldn't blame anyone who complained (if anyone did) that the multiple talk page messages last year were spam. They were. One talk page message is fine.
As for me, since I never saw this year's email message, I'm still at a loss to know what you wanted me to do. Was there a survey? Can I still respond to it? Andrew Dalby (talk) 16:01, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi, @Andrew Dalby: I can resend the email shortly. Best, RMaung (WMF) (talk) 14:59, 2 October 2020 (UTC)