on 3/17/11 8:11 PM, The Richardsons at dons...@optonline.net wrote: > > <Snip> > > Before this, I was mostly opposed to forking. But if this were separated > into a female, male, and co-ed group, and perhaps each person could be a > member if one or two appropriate ones, then we would not have such a > problem. And people part of both lists could correspond with ideas. > Then,this would not be so separate, and maybe not so much opposition and > trolling. Does anyone agree? I think that Collective Action's idea is good, > thoug I don't think that they had the exact same idea that I did. > The initial purpose of a gender-gap List (as I understood it) was to identify and explore the reasons why more females are not participating in the Wikipedia Project, and to try and find some solutions for this. It has become quite obvious that, at the heart of the gender-gap problem, is really a relationship-gap one. That is, one gender finding it difficult to relate to - and be comfortable working with - another gender. Since a project such as Wikipedia (indeed, most all projects) is best served by input from both genders, it is this relationship problem that deserves the strongest focus. If there would be agreement that such a relationship problem does indeed exist, and its solution be the focus and purpose of a Mailing List (or any such forum) what would the single-gender forums have to discuss except to commiserate and share their stories? A gender-relationship-gap can only be tackled and resolved if both genders are participating. The only thing left is if individual members have their own personal problems relating to the other gender. And this can only be resolved on an individual basis.
Marc Riddell _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
