BaseballBugs has a problematic history at the reference desk. This isn't
the first time he's made sexist comments there.[1] Unfortunately, none
of this context was brought up in the discussion about the block. The
unblock was a knee-jerk reaction from a superficial evaluation.
Arguably, the block was a knee-jerk reaction as well. Bad behavior all
around, in my opinion.
Ryan Kaldari
1.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Science/2010_January_21#Orgasm
On 10/12/11 7:10 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote:
I never said that I agreed or disagreed with the block. I was merely
expressing that some of the comments made in regards to the comment
the blocked user made were interesting. A nice selection of people
didn't see anything sexist about the comment, or the potential to find
anything sexist within it. I also think it's not a healthy environment
when people think a witty person is just being, well, witty and clever
as always, and that it's acceptable and perhaps doesn't require any
reprimanding, perhaps on any level.
And I do agree with Fred, the admin was perhaps just reacting to what
they saw - after some of the stories, talk page comments, and behavior
of some users - of any gender - I can see how the occasional admin
jumps the gun. It's very easy to do when you have good faith while
trying to defend the users of an environment you care so deeply about.
I have also been described as a snarky, witty, clever (among other
names....) person and even to this day I open my big mouth and regret
what I say, on occasion. I also expect to be reprimanded when I'm out
of line and while that comment might not have been extreme (as
Fluffernutter pointed out), other comments have been that other users
have been made on Wikipedia and related projects, and people most
often walk off without being "taught" a lesson.
I think it's fascinating. But, perhaps I'm in the minority (oh wait, I
am ;-)...ok..just being witty!)...
-Sarah
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 9:22 PM, <icewe...@gmail.com
<mailto:icewe...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Is there any way to criticize a any action justified with "sexism"
without adding to the persecution complex here? Honest question.
Blocking a user for comments made a week prior falls a mile out of
standard process. Blocking a user who tries to explain himself without
begging for mercy falls a mile out of process. It was a ridiculous
power trip by the blocking admin and was over turned as such.
The only concerning thing in the thread was how a bogus block was
sized upon and defended as an opportunity to crusade against the
"boyzone [sic]".
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
--
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia <http://www.glamwiki.org>
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch>
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
/Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising./
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
