Re: [Gendergap] What's happening at ArbCom re WP:GGTF
Carol: My guess is that pretty much everyone commenting here has and continues to, read the GGTF case. I also agree that Eric can be harsh and his use of certain words offends people. Likewise others in this case also didn't act very well. Personally I think the term he used or the references you used are only offensive if people let them be and a lot of folks seem to be acting like children about using naughty words and language. Personally, I agree with your metaphor and it suits the situation quite well because I think parties on both sides of this debate are getting screwed and I don't think the Arbcom result is going to do anything but make sure no one wants to touch any gender/gender gap related articles. Its also noteworthy that disruption of talk pages is a common tactic used on WP by both sides of arguments, that's not an Eric specific thing but I do agree that needs to be addressed as an institutional problem on the project in general including the Arbcom. Turning pages into a battle grounds to justify blocks are something I have become familiar with lately. Sarah: My guess is that calling one Mr. and one Carol is because they do not know if its Miss, Ms. or Mrs and Mr. is what it is. I doubt its deliberately being disrespectful to her. On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: I must admit, I'm really fascinated by the fact that Eric Corbett is being called Mr. Corbett and Carol Moore is being called Carol Moore' in some of these conversations. And anyone who has spent time on this mailing list and reads interviews, articles, surveys, blahblah with women who edit Wikipedia (not just us uppity types), knows damn well that CIVILITY is one of the reasons we have a gender gap. So this is in fact, about the gender gap. -Sarah On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 9:24 AM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/27/2014 11:22 AM, Tim Davenport wrote: Note well: in the matter of Mr. Corbett we are dealing with the issue of CIVILITY not the matter of THE WIKIPEDIA GENDER GAP. If you read the evidence and the GGTF page you'd see Eric Corbett was being disruptive (while not always uncivil) because he did not want the group to have any effective voice against incivility. Many women consider personal attacks AND harassment to be a major issues driving women off the site, once they sign up and start to edit. Thus Corbett's actions are highly relevant, as are those of a whole list of his friends and supporters and fellow travelers, on GGTF, at other gender gap related discussions, and at the Arbitration. Of course, we all can disagree on whether gang bang and gang bangers are good *metaphors* to describe their behavior at Arbitration. I still think it is, though if I wasn't totally fed up with Wikipedia, I probably would not use it. :-) For now, it's the best metaphor I've got to describe what I now see as Wikipedia's institutionalized harassment. ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap -- Sarah Stierch - Diverse and engaging consulting for your organization. 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
Re: [Gendergap] What's happening at ArbCom re WP:GGTF
Tim: They actually are appealable at AE, they just can't be as undone as quickly as most Eric blocks. Consensus needed to unblock rather than consensus needed for a block to stay. I suspect most of the initial blocks will stick since they aren't too long, but the remedy does call for set longer blocks with additional offenses, and then just escalating blocks - those will almost certainly result in an appeal. Eric isn't Wikipedia's gendergap, but he's certainly both a symptom of and contributor to it. It is unusual to discuss cases like this at length on this list, but when it directly explicitly pertains to the gendergap, has the arbcom of ENWP prohibiting some editors from *mentioning* that there is even a gendergap anywhere on Wikipedia, and where a lot of the language involved is incredibly sexist, we are certainly discussing problems related to the gendergap of the English Wikipedia, which is a discussion that is certainly within the scope of the list. Best, Kevin Gorman On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 8:22 AM, Tim Davenport shoehu...@gmail.com wrote: Kevin Gorman: It's noteworthy that they are not non-appealable blocks. I honestly don't think this is beyond the scope of the list, although it's certainly a depressing topic. Allowing severe gendered slurs to be bandied about with essentially no penalty is likely something that is going to decrease the participation of women on ENWP - which is not a good thing. It bears repeating that what is a severe gendered slur in America is approximately 83.6% less potent as a generalized term of abuse in the UK and Australia.[1] I'm not going to defend Eric using the word cunt, however, he's well aware that he's in the metaphorical room with Americans and if he directs that word towards anyone again there will be repercussions beyond the usual wheel-warring and melodramatic debate... That's not the point I wish to make. Mr. Corbett's (virtually inevitable) future civility blocks will indeed be non-appealable because they are of specified length as part of an Arbcom ruling. Any reversal would probably mean the loss of tools — either those of the bad-blocker or the reverser, based on interpretation of the specific situation at Arbitration Enforcement, where the matter would inevitably go. Frankly, this approach would have solved the Malleus problem a long time ago. Incivility should be a block of specified and reasonable duration (viz., the one imposed on Carol Moore for her gang bangers rant). There are offenses at Wikipedia far worse than blowing one's top and being a jerk. Like systemic copyright violation. Like faking sources. Like mass subtle vandalism. Like repeated insertion of libelous text into BLPs. Like dramatic disruption of the project to score political points. Note well: in the matter of Mr. Corbett we are dealing with the issue of CIVILITY not the matter of THE WIKIPEDIA GENDER GAP. Tim Davenport Corvallis, OR ==Footnotes== [1] Yeah, I made that number up, but it's about right. ___ 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
Re: [Gendergap] What's happening at ArbCom re WP:GGTF
On 11/27/2014 12:36 PM, Reguyla wrote: Carol: My guess is that pretty much everyone commenting here has and continues to, read the GGTF case. I also agree that Eric can be harsh and his use of certain words offends people. Likewise others in this case also didn't act very well. Personally I think the term he used or the references you used are only offensive if people let them be and a lot of folks seem to be acting like children about using naughty words and language. Personally, I agree with your metaphor and it suits the situation quite well because I think parties on both sides of this debate are getting screwed and I don't think the Arbcom result is going to do anything but make sure no one wants to touch any gender/gender gap related articles. The issue is NOT words, as I put it at GGTF talk page right now: /Every set back is just an opportunity for advancement./ Current events only have clarified and dramatized that harassment of those considered powerless (including women) is institutionalized within a small but powerful coterie of editors and administrators and now within ArbCom. (Harass those you want to get rid of til they leave or they over-react, then get them in trouble.) (NOTE HERE: My use of those terms was only because I was harassed so much at Arbitration those words seemed like the most accurate way to describe what was going on!! Also note that I got banned from posting at Arbitration talk page because of the use of words to describe the complicity of ArbCom and the harassers. Truth hurts?) Obviously WMF is going to have to take some incisive interventions. Listing and discussing various alternatives and lobbying for them is the solution. (Plus fun with videos.) Gender gap mailing list will at least have announcements about various steps taken by various individuals, some of which will be post-able here without getting anyone in trouble. (And if trolls have a fit and become disruptive, there's discretionary sanctions.) Meanwhile as a reminder of previously mentioned outside efforts: Genderdesk @ wordpress.com; twitter.com/SaidOnWP; and Wikipediocracy which needs to take a firmer stand; there do seem to be several sexist commentators there. I'm still undecided if want to deal with the drama there or not, and if with my real name or an anonymous handle for fun (and see how long before they figure out it's me). Anyway, as I always say, /onward and upward!/ /That's my story and I'm sticking to it - except as I elaborate further with more insights -) / /CM / ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
[Gendergap] Test
Test. To see if my message appears on [Gendergap]. Marie ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] WP:ANI on Disruption of Gender Gap Task Force
Okay, so this is the last message that I had in my e-mail inbox (it's from 4 September 2014). I've checked my settings and they show me as still subscribing to the list and the check-box to receive the messages is ticked. Can someone please look into how I've dropped off the system? Thanks Marie Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 13:47:08 -0400 From: carolmoor...@verizon.net To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Gendergap] WP:ANI on Disruption of Gender Gap Task Force https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Disruption_of_Wikiproject After multiple complaints by other editors about this, I decided to bring an ANI. It might not be the best constructed one possible. And maybe I'm not the best person to do it, being a little too outspoken (I even make jokes!) and controversial with too many enemies (guys who don't like women who stick to their opinions on hot topics?) But the project is so disrupted I cannot even put up the resources page because I know that it will be gutted down to zilch by one editor especially if I do. (He's been wikihounding me and reverting me for over a year and multiple complaints have come to naught.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1 The community has to face the fact that this is the only Wikiproject under attack. Like I said, other projects don't permit it. Can you imagine if it were permitted on the Palestine or Israel wikiprojects and they were going at each other? Or the Christian and LGBT? Absurd... At least Mr. Wales agrees... sigh... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#WP:ANI_on_.E2.80.9Cdisruption_of_Wikiproject.E2.80.9D CM ___ 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
Re: [Gendergap] WP:ANI on Disruption of Gender Gap Task Force
Check your spam folder and spam filters - many of us have had problems from time to time with mailing list posts winding up in spam or junk. Risker On 29 November 2014 at 16:05, Marie Earley eir...@hotmail.com wrote: Okay, so this is the last message that I had in my e-mail inbox (it's from 4 September 2014). I've checked my settings and they show me as still subscribing to the list and the check-box to receive the messages is ticked. Can someone please look into how I've dropped off the system? Thanks Marie -- Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 13:47:08 -0400 From: carolmoor...@verizon.net To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Gendergap] WP:ANI on Disruption of Gender Gap Task Force https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Disruption_of_Wikiproject After multiple complaints by other editors about this, I decided to bring an ANI. It might not be the best constructed one possible. And maybe I'm not the best person to do it, being a little too outspoken (I even make jokes!) and controversial with too many enemies (guys who don't like women who stick to their opinions on hot topics?) But the project is so disrupted I cannot even put up the resources page because I know that it will be gutted down to zilch by one editor especially if I do. (He's been wikihounding me and reverting me for over a year and multiple complaints have come to naught.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1 The community has to face the fact that this is the only Wikiproject under attack. Like I said, other projects don't permit it. Can you imagine if it were permitted on the Palestine or Israel wikiprojects and they were going at each other? Or the Christian and LGBT? Absurd... At least Mr. Wales agrees... sigh... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#WP:ANI_on_.E2.80.9Cdisruption_of_Wikiproject.E2.80.9D CM ___ 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
Re: [Gendergap] WP:ANI on Disruption of Gender Gap Task Force
Check your spam folder On Nov 29, 2014 4:05 PM, Marie Earley eir...@hotmail.com wrote: Okay, so this is the last message that I had in my e-mail inbox (it's from 4 September 2014). I've checked my settings and they show me as still subscribing to the list and the check-box to receive the messages is ticked. Can someone please look into how I've dropped off the system? Thanks Marie -- Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 13:47:08 -0400 From: carolmoor...@verizon.net To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Gendergap] WP:ANI on Disruption of Gender Gap Task Force https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Disruption_of_Wikiproject After multiple complaints by other editors about this, I decided to bring an ANI. It might not be the best constructed one possible. And maybe I'm not the best person to do it, being a little too outspoken (I even make jokes!) and controversial with too many enemies (guys who don't like women who stick to their opinions on hot topics?) But the project is so disrupted I cannot even put up the resources page because I know that it will be gutted down to zilch by one editor especially if I do. (He's been wikihounding me and reverting me for over a year and multiple complaints have come to naught.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolmooredc/My_Sandbox_1 The community has to face the fact that this is the only Wikiproject under attack. Like I said, other projects don't permit it. Can you imagine if it were permitted on the Palestine or Israel wikiprojects and they were going at each other? Or the Christian and LGBT? Absurd... At least Mr. Wales agrees... sigh... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#WP:ANI_on_.E2.80.9Cdisruption_of_Wikiproject.E2.80.9D CM ___ 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] What's happening at ArbCom re WP:GGTF
Not sure if this will produce a new thread or attach to the existing one (I've checked my spam folder, there's nothing there) but anyway Tim: I just wondered whether you regard this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force#Moving_forward ...as a lack of civility or a gender gap issue? In particular this comment: ...As has been indicated on the talk page of the proposed decision, repeatedly, there is some question as to exactly which women this group seems to be reaching out toward, specifically, whether it is more or less of a more or less radical feminist perspective I thought it summed up in a nutshell what the GGTF was really up against. It's a kind of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism * Are you now or have you ever been a feminist who believes that sex work is the opposite of feminism? Anyone who answers yes that question is judged to be a radical, a subversive who wants to push POV and therefore they are fair game. On WP's list of feminists there were a very odd mish-mash of categories of feminist https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_feministsoldid=544136790 and lots of names missing e.g. Gail Dines. I did a major rewrite to organize it chronologically and it meant that anti-pornography feminists, anti-prostitution feminists and socialist feminists could go onto the list https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_feministsoldid=545667727 The list has recently been changed to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_feminists and I'm working with a couple of editors to see how we can improve it further. I've largely avoided trouble by sticking to admin based work such as this, and similar work: Cleaning up bibliographies, e.g. Joseph Schumpeter, from this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joseph_Schumpeteroldid=633566034#Major_works to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joseph_Schumpeteroldid=634343909#Major_works Creating an article for the International Association for Feminist Economics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Association_for_Feminist_Economics and improving the article for the Human Development and Capability Association https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_and_Capability_Association then creating biographies for past presidents of IAFFE and fellows of the HDCA. Adding DOBs to notable scholars and then adding them to Wiki's calendar (births). These organisations / individuals argues against sex work on the grounds of the perception of women that is generated (i.e. as a thing / object). The problem with the MRA, pro-porn, pro-sex work POV is they have no problem with anti-porn etc. POV provided it is in a box labelled mad or religious with a sub-text that the only people that could possibly support that POV are from the moral right and are probably racist and homophobic as well. The other problem that the MRA have is that, human development and capability, which includes feminist economics / inequality / care work etc. collectively constitutes a 'single broad topic' (WP:SPATG), so they are unable to stop editors, who wish to edit in this area, from doing so. The natural place for this work is within the Gender Studies project. Which is why they write nonsense like this: http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/fighting-wikipedia-corruption-censorship/ (if there were really the kind of censorship that they are talking about on WP then there would be no Pornography Project). Any attempt to show 3 distinct POVs (a) Pro-sex work (b) Right-wing anti-sex work (on moral / judgemental grounds), and (c) Left-wing anti-sex work (on negative perception grounds) - the POV that dare not speak its name ... is met with a steel fist hammered onto the table. I made a video for use in the article sex wars, an article which is all about the separation between (b) and (c) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Feminist_sex_warsoldid=546995190 It was deleted instantly on the grounds that the Video makes little sense and does not add to informational value of article. I dispute that it makes little sense and why does it even need to add informational value? Why can't it just be to add aesthetics to the article as pictures and videos often are? As soon as I step off the path of admin related tasks that the MRA-mob can't get me for, and stray into article content I am jumped on, obstensibly for technical reasons but they are almost exclusively by editors whose other edits are connected to porn and sex-positive feminism, who have pretty much hijacked the Feminism project and they are trying to do as much damage as possible to the Gender Studies project as they can as well. It may be time for an article on fourth-wave feminism which is separate to the history of feminism, but the article would have to say that the term is used by both (a) and (c),
Re: [Gendergap] What's happening at ArbCom re WP:GGTF
To quote you in the context of your dispute over a video, you say I dispute that it makes little sense and why does it even need to add informational value? Why can't it just be to add aesthetics to the article as pictures and videos often are? I ask why don't you take that dispute up with the editor in question? Also, you need to be more clear in what you are saying. I have no context to this message, and I think it is a complaint about a content dispute. Please explain why this is relevant to the gender gap, since you are sending it out to everyone on the gender gap mailing list, and secondly, why a minor content dispute on enwiki is relevant to the Wikimedia gender gap community as a whole. On Nov 30, 2014 1:47 AM, Marie Earley eir...@hotmail.com wrote: Not sure if this will produce a new thread or attach to the existing one (I've checked my spam folder, there's nothing there) but anyway Tim: I just wondered whether you regard this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force#Moving_forward ...as a lack of civility or a gender gap issue? In particular this comment: ...As has been indicated on the talk page of the proposed decision, *repeatedly,* there is some question as to exactly *which* women this group seems to be reaching out toward, specifically, whether it is more or less of a more or less radical feminist perspective I thought it summed up in a nutshell what the GGTF was really up against. It's a kind of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism * Are you now or have you ever been a feminist who believes that sex work is the opposite of feminism? Anyone who answers yes that question is judged to be a radical, a subversive who wants to push POV and therefore they are fair game. On WP's list of feminists there were a very odd mish-mash of categories of feminist https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_feministsoldid=544136790 and lots of names missing e.g. Gail Dines. I did a major rewrite to organize it chronologically and it meant that anti-pornography feminists, anti-prostitution feminists and socialist feminists could go onto the list https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_feministsoldid=545667727 The list has recently been changed to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_feminists and I'm working with a couple of editors to see how we can improve it further. I've largely avoided trouble by sticking to admin based work such as this, and similar work: Cleaning up bibliographies, e.g. Joseph Schumpeter, from this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joseph_Schumpeteroldid=633566034#Major_works to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joseph_Schumpeteroldid=634343909#Major_works Creating an article for the International Association for Feminist Economics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Association_for_Feminist_Economics and improving the article for the Human Development and Capability Association https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_and_Capability_Association then creating biographies for past presidents of IAFFE and fellows of the HDCA. Adding DOBs to notable scholars and then adding them to Wiki's calendar (births). These organisations / individuals argues against sex work on the grounds of the perception of women that is generated (i.e. as a thing / object). The problem with the MRA, pro-porn, pro-sex work POV is they have no problem with anti-porn etc. POV provided it is in a box labelled mad or religious with a sub-text that the only people that could possibly support that POV are from the moral right and are probably racist and homophobic as well. The other problem that the MRA have is that, human development and capability, which includes feminist economics / inequality / care work etc. collectively constitutes a 'single broad topic' (WP:SPATG), so they are unable to stop editors, who wish to edit in this area, from doing so. The natural place for this work is within the Gender Studies project. Which is why they write nonsense like this: http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/fighting-wikipedia-corruption-censorship/ (if there were really the kind of censorship that they are talking about on WP then there would be no Pornography Project). Any attempt to show 3 distinct POVs (a) Pro-sex work (b) Right-wing anti-sex work (on moral / judgemental grounds), and (c) Left-wing anti-sex work (on negative perception grounds) - the POV that dare not speak its name ... is met with a steel fist hammered onto the table. I made a video for use in the article sex wars, an article which is all about the separation between (b) and (c) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Feminist_sex_warsoldid=546995190 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Feminist_sex_wars.ogv It was deleted instantly on the grounds that the Video makes little sense and does not add to
