(: Yes, I think Keilana is a good apple. I think anyone who's been around Wikipedia long enough will encounter a genuine emergency sooner or later, although in my experience there are many more fake or over-hyped "emergencies" than real emergencies.
In my IEGCom capacity, I can say I would be happy to consider interesting proposals for improving civility or decreasing hostility, and I think the Committee as a whole would too. IEGCom is a good group of people with a lot of experience and a lot of diversity, and usually has a good relationship with WMF in the forms of Siko and Anasuya. Please do put ideas into IdeaLab, or you can contact Siko or a Committee member if you want someone to talk privately with about your ideas before you put them into the lab. Pine On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 8:49 PM, Kevin Gorman <kgor...@gmail.com> wrote: > Unfortunately sites like AVfM and its ilk are something that we really do > have limited ability to directly address on Wikipedia, even though it's > something that has a direct effect on the retention of our editors. I've > made AVfM and similar sites way more times than I would like to remember, > as have a lot of other editors who work in the topic area, and many women > editors who identify their gender in general. Even though people can > usually mitigate the effect it has on Wikipedia's content, I don't think > anyone has come up with a remotely effective way to mitigate the effect it > has on the targeted editor. I know quite a few people who have left the > projects over stuff like this, and can honestly say the only reason I'm > still around is because of the number of good friends I've made on the > projects who I can rely on for emotional* support when I need to, as well > as the fact that I occupy a position of significant societal privilege that > lets me take off-wiki harassment and threats less seriously than people who > aren't in my position can. > > I've thought for years that the problem of off-wiki harassment through > this and other means is something that the Foundation will eventually need > to come up with some solution that at least partly mitigates its effects, > or we'll just understandably lose droves of good editors active in topic > areas targeted by it. I don't know what that solution is, although I found > Lane Raspberry's recent IdeaLab proposal ( > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Community_support_services) > that tried to address the issue to be interesting, and would encourage > anyone with interesting or novel ideas about how to potentially help with > this kind of issue bring them up. I can't guarantee any eventual funding > decision, but even if you have an idea that needs monetary support to work, > I know this kind of thing is of both interest to the Foundation and of > interest to volunteers serving on WMF grant-making advisory bodies. (Or > alternately, even if you just have an idea but don't have the bandwidth to > help carry out a project about it, I'd encourage you to bring it up, since > other interested people can connect with you about it and help you refine > it, or even just run with it themselves.) > > Best, > Kevin Gorman > > *And sometimes, other significant forms of support too. Emily/Keilana, > someone I've met in real life once, recently spent well over an hour trying > to contact local emergency services for me in a situation when my roomates > and I needed to do so but couldn't safely do so. After I had asked for > help but before I had fully explained what was going on, my wifi blipped > off, and she was literally calling me within six second of me poofing from > the internet.. and then spent a huge amount of time and frustration trying > to resolve the situation. I can't really put in to words the sort of > feeling provoked by having a Wikimedian who I know almost entirely from > online collaboration willing to drop what she was doing and spend that much > time late at night trying to help us with a situation of that nature. > > > On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 7:38 PM, Marie Earley <eir...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> I placed an ANI about the Voice for Men article and the subsequent >> comments. >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ANI#Off-wiki_comments.2C_possible_multiple_policy_infringements >> The result being: >> > "We cannot take action for off-Wiki discussions like this. However, an >> "announcement" on WP:AN about something like this would have been a wise >> idead instead of ANI (but we all know now) - that we we can keep an eye on >> things. Attacking Wikipedia would be a detriment to their cause - so is >> potentially libelous statements about the Foundation's employees - dumb, >> dumb, dumb thing to do. However, by posting about it here, they know that >> we know. Be vigilant :-) " >> >> I suppose what it does mean is that if insults are hurled about female >> editors off-wiki we can post announcements in WP:AN which begin, >> > "Based on this ruling >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ANI#Off-wiki_comments.2C_possible_multiple_policy_infringements >> I to inform the community about..." >> >> I also had some nice posts sent to me on my talk page. >> >> P.S. I clicked on the link for WP:AN and found this little gem >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AN#Topic_ban_proposal_for_Gibson_Flying_V >> Depressing but at least it's not all one-way traffic. >> >> Marie >> >> ------------------------------ >> Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 18:46:19 -0400 >> From: carolmoor...@verizon.net >> >> To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Moderation and the future of Gendergap-L >> >> Re: the below, yes, i was blocked in a situation I thought was biased >> compared to other blocks I've seen. (I didn't mention that originally it >> was a six month block but the community of mostly guys thought that was >> grossly unfair and it was reduced to two weeks.) >> >> However, in general wikipedia is not half as bad as the Men's rights site >> you mentioned. And in Wikipedia there are "Community Sanctions" on too much >> conflict in men's rights areas. In fact we just had some problems with an >> individual with that bias and he was reminded of the sanctions and was >> stopped. >> >> In general women tend to avoid a lot of issues in the larger world >> because we don't like conflict. And that's understandable given that when >> guys do it with each other its considered a team sport. But when women jump >> in the middle, even if they know the rules (which we don't always), they >> usually are going to be given a harder time, expected to work harder and do >> better to get half the respect. That's the nature of the reality we are >> trying to change throughout the world and wikipedia is just one part of >> that larger world. >> >> We don't have to accept all the rules but we can't change them unless we >> have some engagement. Even if the engagement is "these rules are >> male-created and reflect male values/attitudes/etc. and we want and equal >> say in creating the rules." >> >> To understand Wikipedia dispute resolution you really have to study this >> page: >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution >> >> Except in the worst cases of abuse, you don't need to go to ANI. When >> the problem is guys ignoring you or reverting you too much or whatever it >> is they are doing cause they think they can get away with it (including if >> that reason is that you are female), there are a variety of options. I've >> used them all at different times, with more or less success depending on >> circumstances. >> >> CM >> >> >> On 7/1/2014 10:03 PM, Marie Earley wrote: >> >> >> Gosh, I did make a pig's ear out of it didn't I. I didn't realize the >> list had two Sarahs on it. >> >> Third time lucky.... >> >> In a discussion about off-Wiki mentions of editors, I was making a >> comparison between Carol Moore's suspension which she mentioned here >> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/2014-June/004397.html in >> answer to SlimVirgin (aka Sarah), in which Carol said: >> >> > "questioning behavior too aggressively off wikipedia evidently remains >> a no no. I was once blocked for a week for asking an editor whether his >> overwhelming history of editing in articles about bondage of females was >> related to his obvious and annoying harassment of me on a noticeboard, >> after which I mentioned the issue on the Wikia Feminism page which I >> thought was a part of Wikipedia (duh). The latter evidently was the bigger >> "no no"." >> >> ...and some of the stuff in an article on A Voice for Men's website. >> >> The third paragraph of this message >> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/2014-June/004409.html >> therefore should have read (correction in capital letters): >> > I entered "Wikipedia" and "male rights activists" and got this >> http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/fighting-wikipedia-corruption-censorship/ >> which has a comments section at the bottom with current Wikipedia members >> mentioning other Wikipedia editors by name and talk of a great conspiracy >> at work against them, if CAROL was suspended for her off-site comments then >> how is this permissible? >> >> And LtPowers point that Wikipedia may simply not know is correct. >> Perhaps, editors just have to run the gauntlet / try and recruit more women >> / be a bit more pro-active about looking for and reporting off-wiki >> activities which break the rules and not just leave it to moderators. With >> that in mind I have reported the article to WP:ANI >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Off-wiki_comments.2C_possible_multiple_policy_infringements >> >> Marie >> >> ------------------------------ >> Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 20:31:42 -0700 >> From: slimvir...@gmail.com >> To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Moderation and the future of Gendergap-L >> >> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 8:22 PM, Jeremy Baron <jer...@tuxmachine.com> >> wrote: >> >> On Jun 30, 2014 11:14 PM, "Sarah" <slimvir...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Jeremy, which quote is this? I recall someone on this list saying that >> someone called Sarah was suspended (unclear what's meant) for an off-wiki >> comment. (Or something like that; I can't find the original.) I can't think >> of how that might apply to me, and Sarah Stierch has said it doesn't apply >> to her. >> >> See this message from earlier on this thread: >> >> On Jun 29, 2014 8:30 PM Eastern, "Marie Earley" <eir...@hotmail.com> >> wrote: >> > My apologies it was Carol Moore responding to Sarah Stierch earlier on, >> I mentioned it from memory, >> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/2014-June/004397.html >> >> If you follow Marie's link and then dig up the original message quoted at >> the link from "Sarah" you'll find it was SlimVirgin not Sarah Stierch >> (Marie apparently misattributed). >> >> I haven't read all the mails, just did a bit of digging >> . >> >> >> Okay, thanks, Jeremy. I don't follow what it's about, but the original >> comment wasn't made by me or about me, and the comment that seemed to be >> about Sarah Stierch was a misunderstanding. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list >> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gendergap mailing >> listGendergap@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ 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 >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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
