https://www.wikipediasucks.co/forum/vie ... =11&t=1276
Anyway I am going to address one point.
CrowNest goes on to imply that because the community has no rights, it's ok for the Foundation to ban individual users for any reason or no reason at all.CrowsNest wrote: So speaking in terms of absolute truth, the community has no rights. Certainly not to free assembly, expression, self-determination, self-defense, or any other right you can apply to a nominal group in any other context.
It's just not done. And it's every wiki-addict's worst nightmare to have put in over a decade of hard work and emotional effort and then to be tossed aside, blinked out of existence on the site. Whether this is a healthy personal attitude is irrelevant. Participating on the site is very important to them, and being summarily banned is a painful and traumatic experience.
So maybe Wikipedians have no rights, but they can certainly decide that the WMF is failing to uphold its end of the bargain, and they can make noise. They can even disrupt and vandalize the site. WMF broke the agreed-upon rules. Everything is on the table now. No one has to leave quietly.