Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons
Hi Janine, Of the links that you mentioned I was only able to get one of them to work, but I searched for friendlier IRC clients and I think I've found one. It's called Kiwi IRC. I'll ask the Freenode people what they think about changing their default web client to Kiwi. If they want to keep their current client it may still be possible for Wikimedia to change the default chat client used when people connect directly from English Wikipedia to #wikipedia-en-help. Pine On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: Janine, can you share links to the sites? I'm seriously interested in this idea of a friendlier interface for IRC. Pine On Aug 2, 2014 8:03 PM, Janine Starykowicz jrst...@barntowire.com wrote: One of the sites I've found them on is more technical, but another is definitely not. The embedded version is very newbie friendly. Janine Pine W wrote: That sounds workable and hopefully friendly. Pine On Aug 2, 2014 7:51 PM, Janine Starykowicz jrst...@barntowire.com mailto:jrst...@barntowire.com wrote: There are plenty of people using IRC, but many of them don't know it. There are chatroom/IRC hybrids, generally on forum sites. You embed the chat window in a web page, and anyone can join in. Those who want can use any IRC client to get to the same channel, but with more features. http://www.irchighway.net/ http://mibbit.com/ Janine Sarah Stierch wrote: Exactly. IRC is for the old school and ubergeek. And as Sue has said in the past - we're only going to retain specific types of people to be long term editors (ubergeeks like us) but, if we can figure out a solution to help out the average joe/sphine editor... ___ 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] Sexualized environment on Commons
On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 7:34 AM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: 5. Better cheat sheets are needed. People complain about how cluttered and overwhelming they are. Just like our online help pages. They're full of Wikipediababblespeak and not to the point. 6. More guides on how to do events. I have developed checklists and so forth for people. I know how much Wikimedians hate writing documentation, but honestly, I know for a fact that Wikipedians in Residency's have started because of the case study I wrote, I know for a fact GLAMs have done content donations because of the case studies I write, and I know for a fact that people have ready the case study I wrote about edit-a-thons and learned from it and done it. I make powerpoints and post them and encourage people to reuse them, and they do. It is also important to automate help. I have not seen much progress along those lines. 'Computing with words' is a mature subject. Best A. Mani A. Mani [Last_Name. First_Name Format] CU, ASL, AMS, ISRS, CLC, CMS HomePage: http://www.logicamani.in Blog: http://logicamani.blogspot.in/ ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons
On 8/2/2014 1:37 AM, Keilana wrote: To briefly go back to what Sarah and Marie have said, I do find that in person hand-holding and social support are the most effective factors in getting women to stick around. I don't know how to translate that from the real-world environment I teach newbies in to the virtual environment of new users' talk pages. I'd love to brainstorm something in that vein, though. :) -Emily Lots of SKYPE mini- seminars!!! (Women only.) ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons
IRC is almost embarrassingly old technology; Wikimedia Foundation projects are the only place I've seen it mentioned in the last five years or more. On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: We already have #wikipedia-en-help which is remarkably good for a volunteer help project. Links to join that IRC channel could be offered in multiple places. Other languages may have similar channels. Pine On Aug 2, 2014 8:42 AM, Jeremy Baron jer...@tuxmachine.com wrote: On Aug 2, 2014 11:01 AM, LtPowers ltpowers_w...@rochester.rr.com wrote: And then there could be a little chat window allowing real-time communication while the editor walks through her first edit. [originally didn't realize who you were replying to… also haven't read the whole thread yet] That is technically feasible. Maybe would have new implications for privacy (including WMF privacy policy). Unless the realtime chats were publicly logged. (then same privacy as existing teahouse, etc) Essentially would be a more interactive version of teahouse? (i.e. shorter wait for a reply and you're paired with someone that's known to be available at that moment) would be a part of teahouse? How would you staff it? Shifts? Anyway, that does nothing for the case Kathleen describes. 25 people (20f:5m) in a class and everyone getting that introduction to all things wiki. Then 7 stay active for a year including all the men. (and only 2 of the 20 women) I'm leaning towards thinking we as a community should (for now) focus more on the retention gap than the recruitment gap. Then we're not recruiting people just to (mostly) lose them in a month or two. But would be interested to hear thoughts on that from someone with a more rigorous analysis. -Jeremy (jeremyb) P.S. http://www.onthemedia.org/story/31-race-swap-experiment/ ___ 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 -- Michael J. Orange Mike Lowrey When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes. -- Desiderius Erasmus ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons
That's exactly my point, Pine. This kind of inside-baseball geekery is so much Choctaw to the ordinary new editor we are trying to recruit and retain, people more likely to be using Pinterest or Skype or Ravelry to communicate with peers and mentors. On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 8:54 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: You might be surprised how widely and how much Freenode is used for open source projects. The Blender main and dev channels were even more active than English Wikipedia's equivalents when I visited a few days ago. Pine On Aug 2, 2014 6:38 PM, Michael J. Lowrey orangem...@gmail.com wrote: IRC is almost embarrassingly old technology; Wikimedia Foundation projects are the only place I've seen it mentioned in the last five years or more. On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: We already have #wikipedia-en-help which is remarkably good for a volunteer help project. Links to join that IRC channel could be offered in multiple places. Other languages may have similar channels. Pine On Aug 2, 2014 8:42 AM, Jeremy Baron jer...@tuxmachine.com wrote: On Aug 2, 2014 11:01 AM, LtPowers ltpowers_w...@rochester.rr.com wrote: And then there could be a little chat window allowing real-time communication while the editor walks through her first edit. [originally didn't realize who you were replying to… also haven't read the whole thread yet] That is technically feasible. Maybe would have new implications for privacy (including WMF privacy policy). Unless the realtime chats were publicly logged. (then same privacy as existing teahouse, etc) Essentially would be a more interactive version of teahouse? (i.e. shorter wait for a reply and you're paired with someone that's known to be available at that moment) would be a part of teahouse? How would you staff it? Shifts? Anyway, that does nothing for the case Kathleen describes. 25 people (20f:5m) in a class and everyone getting that introduction to all things wiki. Then 7 stay active for a year including all the men. (and only 2 of the 20 women) I'm leaning towards thinking we as a community should (for now) focus more on the retention gap than the recruitment gap. Then we're not recruiting people just to (mostly) lose them in a month or two. But would be interested to hear thoughts on that from someone with a more rigorous analysis. -Jeremy (jeremyb) P.S. http://www.onthemedia.org/story/31-race-swap-experiment/ ___ 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 -- Michael J. Orange Mike Lowrey When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes. -- Desiderius Erasmus ___ 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 -- Michael J. Orange Mike Lowrey When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes. -- Desiderius Erasmus ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons
Exactly. IRC is for the old school and ubergeek. And as Sue has said in the past - we're only going to retain specific types of people to be long term editors (ubergeeks like us) but, if we can figure out a solution to help out the average joe/sphine editor... then huzzah. That's what the Teahouse helped do, but what is the next step to supporting people who haven't quite passed the barrier to editing Wikipedia. And expecting people to want to join the ranks through OTRS emails surely isn't the ultimate goal.. -Sarah On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 7:02 PM, Michael J. Lowrey orangem...@gmail.com wrote: That's exactly my point, Pine. This kind of inside-baseball geekery is so much Choctaw to the ordinary new editor we are trying to recruit and retain, people more likely to be using Pinterest or Skype or Ravelry to communicate with peers and mentors. On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 8:54 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: You might be surprised how widely and how much Freenode is used for open source projects. The Blender main and dev channels were even more active than English Wikipedia's equivalents when I visited a few days ago. Pine On Aug 2, 2014 6:38 PM, Michael J. Lowrey orangem...@gmail.com wrote: IRC is almost embarrassingly old technology; Wikimedia Foundation projects are the only place I've seen it mentioned in the last five years or more. On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: We already have #wikipedia-en-help which is remarkably good for a volunteer help project. Links to join that IRC channel could be offered in multiple places. Other languages may have similar channels. Pine On Aug 2, 2014 8:42 AM, Jeremy Baron jer...@tuxmachine.com wrote: On Aug 2, 2014 11:01 AM, LtPowers ltpowers_w...@rochester.rr.com wrote: And then there could be a little chat window allowing real-time communication while the editor walks through her first edit. [originally didn't realize who you were replying to… also haven't read the whole thread yet] That is technically feasible. Maybe would have new implications for privacy (including WMF privacy policy). Unless the realtime chats were publicly logged. (then same privacy as existing teahouse, etc) Essentially would be a more interactive version of teahouse? (i.e. shorter wait for a reply and you're paired with someone that's known to be available at that moment) would be a part of teahouse? How would you staff it? Shifts? Anyway, that does nothing for the case Kathleen describes. 25 people (20f:5m) in a class and everyone getting that introduction to all things wiki. Then 7 stay active for a year including all the men. (and only 2 of the 20 women) I'm leaning towards thinking we as a community should (for now) focus more on the retention gap than the recruitment gap. Then we're not recruiting people just to (mostly) lose them in a month or two. But would be interested to hear thoughts on that from someone with a more rigorous analysis. -Jeremy (jeremyb) P.S. http://www.onthemedia.org/story/31-race-swap-experiment/ ___ 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 -- Michael J. Orange Mike Lowrey When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes. -- Desiderius Erasmus ___ 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 -- Michael J. Orange Mike Lowrey When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes. -- Desiderius Erasmus ___ 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
Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons
I think we are talking past each other. The issue I responded to was about live help, which we offer, is used extensively for English Wikipedia, and should be respected. Advertising the existing service to more editors is surely better than not doing so. If we are talking about longer-term alternative help systems then I agree that we should explore options like Pintrest which seem to be popular with less technical audiences. Pine On Aug 2, 2014 7:06 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: Exactly. IRC is for the old school and ubergeek. And as Sue has said in the past - we're only going to retain specific types of people to be long term editors (ubergeeks like us) but, if we can figure out a solution to help out the average joe/sphine editor... then huzzah. That's what the Teahouse helped do, but what is the next step to supporting people who haven't quite passed the barrier to editing Wikipedia. And expecting people to want to join the ranks through OTRS emails surely isn't the ultimate goal.. -Sarah On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 7:02 PM, Michael J. Lowrey orangem...@gmail.com wrote: That's exactly my point, Pine. This kind of inside-baseball geekery is so much Choctaw to the ordinary new editor we are trying to recruit and retain, people more likely to be using Pinterest or Skype or Ravelry to communicate with peers and mentors. On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 8:54 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: You might be surprised how widely and how much Freenode is used for open source projects. The Blender main and dev channels were even more active than English Wikipedia's equivalents when I visited a few days ago. Pine On Aug 2, 2014 6:38 PM, Michael J. Lowrey orangem...@gmail.com wrote: IRC is almost embarrassingly old technology; Wikimedia Foundation projects are the only place I've seen it mentioned in the last five years or more. On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: We already have #wikipedia-en-help which is remarkably good for a volunteer help project. Links to join that IRC channel could be offered in multiple places. Other languages may have similar channels. Pine On Aug 2, 2014 8:42 AM, Jeremy Baron jer...@tuxmachine.com wrote: On Aug 2, 2014 11:01 AM, LtPowers ltpowers_w...@rochester.rr.com wrote: And then there could be a little chat window allowing real-time communication while the editor walks through her first edit. [originally didn't realize who you were replying to… also haven't read the whole thread yet] That is technically feasible. Maybe would have new implications for privacy (including WMF privacy policy). Unless the realtime chats were publicly logged. (then same privacy as existing teahouse, etc) Essentially would be a more interactive version of teahouse? (i.e. shorter wait for a reply and you're paired with someone that's known to be available at that moment) would be a part of teahouse? How would you staff it? Shifts? Anyway, that does nothing for the case Kathleen describes. 25 people (20f:5m) in a class and everyone getting that introduction to all things wiki. Then 7 stay active for a year including all the men. (and only 2 of the 20 women) I'm leaning towards thinking we as a community should (for now) focus more on the retention gap than the recruitment gap. Then we're not recruiting people just to (mostly) lose them in a month or two. But would be interested to hear thoughts on that from someone with a more rigorous analysis. -Jeremy (jeremyb) P.S. http://www.onthemedia.org/story/31-race-swap-experiment/ ___ 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 -- Michael J. Orange Mike Lowrey When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes. -- Desiderius Erasmus ___ 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 -- Michael J. Orange Mike Lowrey When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes. -- Desiderius Erasmus ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap -- Sarah Stierch - Diverse and engaging consulting for your organization.
Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons
Thank you, Sarah. I hope that subjects like this will be part of the discussion in Washington, whether I get to go or not. (I have applied, but I'm an old white male so….) On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: Exactly. IRC is for the old school and ubergeek. And as Sue has said in the past - we're only going to retain specific types of people to be long term editors (ubergeeks like us) but, if we can figure out a solution to help out the average joe/sphine editor... then huzzah. That's what the Teahouse helped do, but what is the next step to supporting people who haven't quite passed the barrier to editing Wikipedia. And expecting people to want to join the ranks through OTRS emails surely isn't the ultimate goal.. -Sarah On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 7:02 PM, Michael J. Lowrey orangem...@gmail.com wrote: That's exactly my point, Pine. This kind of inside-baseball geekery is so much Choctaw to the ordinary new editor we are trying to recruit and retain, people more likely to be using Pinterest or Skype or Ravelry to communicate with peers and mentors. On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 8:54 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: You might be surprised how widely and how much Freenode is used for open source projects. The Blender main and dev channels were even more active than English Wikipedia's equivalents when I visited a few days ago. Pine On Aug 2, 2014 6:38 PM, Michael J. Lowrey orangem...@gmail.com wrote: IRC is almost embarrassingly old technology; Wikimedia Foundation projects are the only place I've seen it mentioned in the last five years or more. On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: We already have #wikipedia-en-help which is remarkably good for a volunteer help project. Links to join that IRC channel could be offered in multiple places. Other languages may have similar channels. Pine On Aug 2, 2014 8:42 AM, Jeremy Baron jer...@tuxmachine.com wrote: On Aug 2, 2014 11:01 AM, LtPowers ltpowers_w...@rochester.rr.com wrote: And then there could be a little chat window allowing real-time communication while the editor walks through her first edit. [originally didn't realize who you were replying to… also haven't read the whole thread yet] That is technically feasible. Maybe would have new implications for privacy (including WMF privacy policy). Unless the realtime chats were publicly logged. (then same privacy as existing teahouse, etc) Essentially would be a more interactive version of teahouse? (i.e. shorter wait for a reply and you're paired with someone that's known to be available at that moment) would be a part of teahouse? How would you staff it? Shifts? Anyway, that does nothing for the case Kathleen describes. 25 people (20f:5m) in a class and everyone getting that introduction to all things wiki. Then 7 stay active for a year including all the men. (and only 2 of the 20 women) I'm leaning towards thinking we as a community should (for now) focus more on the retention gap than the recruitment gap. Then we're not recruiting people just to (mostly) lose them in a month or two. But would be interested to hear thoughts on that from someone with a more rigorous analysis. -Jeremy (jeremyb) P.S. http://www.onthemedia.org/story/31-race-swap-experiment/ ___ 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 -- Michael J. Orange Mike Lowrey When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes. -- Desiderius Erasmus ___ 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 -- Michael J. Orange Mike Lowrey When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes. -- Desiderius Erasmus ___ 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 -- Michael J. Orange Mike Lowrey When I get a little money I buy books;
Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons
There are plenty of people using IRC, but many of them don't know it. There are chatroom/IRC hybrids, generally on forum sites. You embed the chat window in a web page, and anyone can join in. Those who want can use any IRC client to get to the same channel, but with more features. http://www.irchighway.net/ http://mibbit.com/ Janine Sarah Stierch wrote: Exactly. IRC is for the old school and ubergeek. And as Sue has said in the past - we're only going to retain specific types of people to be long term editors (ubergeeks like us) but, if we can figure out a solution to help out the average joe/sphine editor... ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons
On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 7:10 PM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: Then I looked at this political poster image https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Courageous_Cunts.jpg which leads to this site http://courageouscunts.com/ I think nobody has bothered to write much on the movement. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courageous_Cunts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labia_pride_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Labia_Project has no content Contrast that with the content on this site: http://largelabiaproject.org Best A. Mani A. Mani [Last_Name. First_Name Format] CU, ASL, AMS, ISRS, CLC, CMS HomePage: http://www.logicamani.in Blog: http://logicamani.blogspot.in/ ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons
To briefly go back to what Sarah and Marie have said, I do find that in person hand-holding and social support are the most effective factors in getting women to stick around. I don't know how to translate that from the real-world environment I teach newbies in to the virtual environment of new users' talk pages. I'd love to brainstorm something in that vein, though. :) -Emily On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 11:40 PM, A. Mani a.mani@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 7:10 PM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: Then I looked at this political poster image https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Courageous_Cunts.jpg which leads to this site http://courageouscunts.com/ I think nobody has bothered to write much on the movement. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courageous_Cunts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labia_pride_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Labia_Project has no content Contrast that with the content on this site: http://largelabiaproject.org Best A. Mani A. Mani [Last_Name. First_Name Format] CU, ASL, AMS, ISRS, CLC, CMS HomePage: http://www.logicamani.in Blog: http://logicamani.blogspot.in/ ___ 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] Sexualized environment on Commons
On 7/30/2014 11:39 PM, LB wrote: Twice during my short discussion about how to start a civility board, which turned into a long discussion about the word c*nt, an Admin gave the link to the Commons search results for that word, saying that showed that the text of the word isn't very offensive. WTF?! Actually I just searched for the first time and saw all photos were regarding Courageous Cunts and had a whole rant written on a talk page thinking it was some pervert thing. Then I looked at this political poster image https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Courageous_Cunts.jpg which leads to this site http://courageouscunts.com/ Which says: This is a protest page! We're a group of girls that got quite angry about the growing propaganda to surgically improve the female genitalia. Don't get us wrong: we're not blaming any woman for her conscious, informed decision. If you really want labiaplasty, go ahead. It's the alliance between porn and the medical industry we're opposed to. It's about their campaign to sell us the perfect labia. Here we try to raise a voice against it! Also CC's are at: https://www.flickr.com/people/76200162@N06 And saw all the photos l looked at were upload by by user: courageousC*nts So I assume it is a woman or women who were real ticked off about this in 2012? Unless it is a guy who used this evidently real issue as an excuse to get his jollies taking photos of shaved women. All that shaving does make me a bit suspicious... Also I noticed there are all sorts of photos under both male and female genitalia which probably are excessive in number and/or in detail, but not an issue I'm have energy to do much about. CM ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons
Twice during my short discussion about how to start a civility board, which turned into a long discussion about the word c*nt, an Admin gave the link to the Commons search results for that word, saying that showed that the text of the word isn't very offensive. WTF?! On Jul 30, 2014 7:55 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: Nope and I get consistent messages on and off wiki from women saying cheat sheets are poorly designed or people are too busy... But I don't think surveys are being done about workshops and the guides they pass out (I believe in throwing people into the pool to learn how to swim). I Still stand by hand holding...personal out weighs what we attempt... But perhaps I am old school in the world of wiki. I also lost a job to trolls who coincidentally also disagreed with my beliefs on commons...so I am particularly sensitive. Commons is a terrible and demoralizing place. The women's Commons revolution won't happen anytime soon. Sarah ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons
I presume that uploaders only upload images they are personally comfortable with, so it is almost axiomatic that it would be others who would probably add such classifications, just as occurs with movies. I have no idea how IMDB make it work, but they do and they are using volunteers too. I note that IMDB use a 1-to-10 scale for the classifications. Maybe they just let people vote and the result is the average. But, whether or not my proposal can work, I think we have to use this list to put forward ideas with a view to rolling out some kind of trial/pilot/experiment. The gender gap is of long standing and is unlikely to spontaneously disappear by just talking about it. Kerry _ From: Carol Moore dc [mailto:carolmoor...@verizon.net] Sent: Friday, 25 July 2014 6:34 AM To: kerry.raym...@gmail.com; Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation of women within Wikimedia projects. Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons While this can work in some situations, in a Wiki run by volunteers you rely on people to accurately self-classify their work, which many would not. Or you rely on other volunteers changing the rating. Whether up or down, it probably will lead to a big debate. This dozens or even hundreds of debates a day, which would be quite time consuming. Too many people already try to AfD photos for phony reasons. (I don't like that person; I don't believe you took the picture! being one I encountered myself.) On 7/23/2014 9:51 PM, Kerry Raymond wrote: I agree that offensiveness is in the eye of the beholder. And while there may be all manner of very niche groups who find strange things offensiveness, maybe some people object to seeing refrigerators or reading about cakes, nonetheless we know that there are a lot of widespread categories of offensiveness that generate the bulk of discussions about the inclusion of items on Wikipedia or Commons. What we could do is to have to some system of classification (like the movies) for articles, images, and/or categories indicating that they are potentially offensive for various reasons. Perhaps along similar lines to the content advisories in IMDB, e.g. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/parentalguide?ref_=tt_stry_pg People could then put in their profiles that all classifications are acceptable or them or that these are the classifications they don't want to see (e.g. Sex and Nudity, Gore and Violence, Profanity, etc - obviously our classifications might not be identical to IMDB as we are dealing with different kinds of content but you get the idea). When that person searches Wikipedia or Commons, then those articles, images and categories that they would find offensive are not returned. When a person reads an article containing an offensive-to-them categorised image, it is simply not displayed or some image saying Suppressed at your request (Sex and Nudity). We could possibly bundle such these finer classifications into common collections, e.g. Inappropriate for Children, Suitable for Muslims, or whatever, so for many people it's a simple tick-one-box. For anonymous users or users who have not explicitly set their preferences, rendering of an article or image could first ask This article/image has been tagged as potentially offensive for SuchAndSuch reason, click OK to confirm you want to view it. If they are a logged-in user, it could also offer a link to set their preferences for future use. I note that movies are often made with variants for different countries. Sometimes that's simply a matter of being dubbed into another language but it can also include the deletion (or replacement) of certain scenes or language that would be offensive in those countries. So it is not as if we are reinventing the wheel here, just customising it to Wikipedia. Kerry ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons
Ryan, thanks for bringing this up for discussion. I've put a lot of thought into the series of photos this comes from over the years, and it's well worth some discussion. I'd like to hear what others think about this. Here is a link to the category for the larger collection; warning, there's lots of nudity and sexual objectification here, so don't click if you don't want to see that: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Nude_portrayals_of_computer_technology First, I agree with Ryan that in the (various) deletion discussions I've seen around this and similar topics, there is often a toxic level of childish and offensive comments. I think that's a significant problem, and I don't know what can be done to improve it. Scolding people in those discussions often a backfires, and serves only to amplify the offensive commentary. But silence can imply tacit consent. How should one participate in the discussion, promoting an outcome one believes in, without contributing to or enabling the toxic nature of the discourse? I think I've done a decent job of walking that line in similar discussions, but I'm sure there's a lot of room for better approaches. I would love to hear what has worked for others, here and/or privately. Also, my initial reaction to these images is that they are inherently offensive; my gut reaction is to keep them off Commons. But after thinking it through and reading through a number of deletion discussions, the conclusion I've come to (at least so far) is that the decision to keep them (in spite of the childish and offensive commentary along the way) is the right decision. These strike me as the important points: * We have a collection of more than 20 million images, intended to support a wide diversity of educational projects. Among those 20 million files are a great many that would be offensive to some audience. (For instance, if I understand correctly, *all images portraying people* are offensive to at least some devout Muslims.) * Were these images originally intended to promote objectification of women? To support insightful commentary on objectification of women? Something else? I can't see into the minds of their creators, but I *can* imagine them being put to all kinds of uses, some of which would be worthwhile. The intent of the photographer and models, I've come to believe, is not relevant to the decision. (apart from the basic issue of consent in the next bullet point:) * Unlike many images on Commons, I see no reason to doubt that these were produced by consenting adults, and intended for public distribution. If they are to be deleted, what is the principle under which we would delete them? To me, that's the key question. If it's simply the fact that we as individuals find them offensive, I don't think that's sufficient. If it's out of a belief that they inherently cause more harm than good, I think the reasons for that would need to be fleshed out before they could be persuasive. Art is often meant to be provocative, to challenge our assumptions and sensibilities, to prompt discussion. We host a lot of art on Commons. On what basis would we delete these, but keep other controversial works of art? Of course it would be terrible to use these in, for instance, a Wikipedia article about HTML syntax. But overall, does it cause harm to simply have them exist in an image repository? My own conclusion with regard to this photo series is that the net value of maintaining a large and diverse collection of media, without endorsing its contents per se., outweighs other considerations. (For anybody interested in the deletion process on Commons, the kinds of things that are deliberated, and the way the discussions go, you might be interested in my related blog post from a couple months ago: http://wikistrategies.net/wikimedia-commons-is-far-from-ethically-broken/ ) -Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]] On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote: If anyone ever needs a good example of the locker-room environment on Wikimedia Commons, I just came across this old deletion discussion: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Radio_button_and_female_nude.jpg The last two keep votes are especially interesting. One need look no farther than the current Main Page talk page for more of the same (search for premature ejaculation). Kaldari ___ 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] Sexualized environment on Commons
Personally, I don't think it's worth having a discussion here about the merits of deleting these images. There's no chance in hell they are going to be deleted from Commons. What I'm more interested in is the locker-room nature of the discussions and how/if this can be addressed, as I think that is actually more likely to dissuade female contributors than the images themselves. Ryan Kaldari On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote: Ryan, thanks for bringing this up for discussion. I've put a lot of thought into the series of photos this comes from over the years, and it's well worth some discussion. I'd like to hear what others think about this. Here is a link to the category for the larger collection; warning, there's lots of nudity and sexual objectification here, so don't click if you don't want to see that: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Nude_portrayals_of_computer_technology First, I agree with Ryan that in the (various) deletion discussions I've seen around this and similar topics, there is often a toxic level of childish and offensive comments. I think that's a significant problem, and I don't know what can be done to improve it. Scolding people in those discussions often a backfires, and serves only to amplify the offensive commentary. But silence can imply tacit consent. How should one participate in the discussion, promoting an outcome one believes in, without contributing to or enabling the toxic nature of the discourse? I think I've done a decent job of walking that line in similar discussions, but I'm sure there's a lot of room for better approaches. I would love to hear what has worked for others, here and/or privately. Also, my initial reaction to these images is that they are inherently offensive; my gut reaction is to keep them off Commons. But after thinking it through and reading through a number of deletion discussions, the conclusion I've come to (at least so far) is that the decision to keep them (in spite of the childish and offensive commentary along the way) is the right decision. These strike me as the important points: * We have a collection of more than 20 million images, intended to support a wide diversity of educational projects. Among those 20 million files are a great many that would be offensive to some audience. (For instance, if I understand correctly, *all images portraying people* are offensive to at least some devout Muslims.) * Were these images originally intended to promote objectification of women? To support insightful commentary on objectification of women? Something else? I can't see into the minds of their creators, but I *can* imagine them being put to all kinds of uses, some of which would be worthwhile. The intent of the photographer and models, I've come to believe, is not relevant to the decision. (apart from the basic issue of consent in the next bullet point:) * Unlike many images on Commons, I see no reason to doubt that these were produced by consenting adults, and intended for public distribution. If they are to be deleted, what is the principle under which we would delete them? To me, that's the key question. If it's simply the fact that we as individuals find them offensive, I don't think that's sufficient. If it's out of a belief that they inherently cause more harm than good, I think the reasons for that would need to be fleshed out before they could be persuasive. Art is often meant to be provocative, to challenge our assumptions and sensibilities, to prompt discussion. We host a lot of art on Commons. On what basis would we delete these, but keep other controversial works of art? Of course it would be terrible to use these in, for instance, a Wikipedia article about HTML syntax. But overall, does it cause harm to simply have them exist in an image repository? My own conclusion with regard to this photo series is that the net value of maintaining a large and diverse collection of media, without endorsing its contents per se., outweighs other considerations. (For anybody interested in the deletion process on Commons, the kinds of things that are deliberated, and the way the discussions go, you might be interested in my related blog post from a couple months ago: http://wikistrategies.net/wikimedia-commons-is-far-from-ethically-broken/ ) -Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]] On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote: If anyone ever needs a good example of the locker-room environment on Wikimedia Commons, I just came across this old deletion discussion: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Radio_button_and_female_nude.jpg The last two keep votes are especially interesting. One need look no farther than the current Main Page talk page for more of the same (search for premature ejaculation). Kaldari ___ Gendergap mailing
Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 2:10 PM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote: Personally, I don't think it's worth having a discussion here about the merits of deleting these images. There's no chance in hell they are going to be deleted from Commons. What I'm more interested in is the locker-room nature of the discussions and how/if this can be addressed, as I think that is actually more likely to dissuade female contributors than the images themselves. Totally reasonable, and I agree that would be a useful discussion. Not that anybody needs my permission, but please feel free to disregard the parts of my message that don't relate to this -- and sorry if it was an unwanted distraction. For the discussion you're suggesting, it might be worthwhile to review the behavior-related policies and guidelines on Commons. It might be fruitful to develop, seek consensus around, and begin enforcing one or more new guidelines related to this stuff. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Commons_policies_and_guidelines In my experience, I think it tends to be a small number of users who engage in this sort of thing, and if the behavior can be clearly and dispassionately described, it might be possible to chip away at the culture that makes it seem acceptable. A big project, but a worthy one. Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]] ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons
On 7/23/2014 5:10 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote: Personally, I don't think it's worth having a discussion here about the merits of deleting these images. There's no chance in hell they are going to be deleted from Commons. What I'm more interested in is the locker-room nature of the discussions and how/if this can be addressed, as I think that is actually more likely to dissuade female contributors than the images themselves. Ryan Kaldari As long as they aren't in articles (or at least those most women are likely to end up at), it's not likely most women will see them and be dissuaded by that aspect of editing. Constantly reminding women they exist through this list or the Gender Gap Task Force probably would be more of a turn off. On the other hand, having a separate list which will, among other things, post notices of all such AfDs for those likely to want to AfD them might help get rid of some of the worse ones. And it might raise the consciousness of at least a few guys as to just how tacky they are. (I might join it for a while, but there's only so much one can take!) Another idea is to start Stupid sexist Wikicommons upload of the week (or day) page or -more likely - off wiki blog and make sure Wikicommons people all know about it. At least it would be evidence some in the wiki community are fed up with it and make it generally easy to AfD the most gratuitous images. Make it a facebook page with text making it clear LIKE means you think it's stupid and should be the Stupid sexist upload of the Day/Week - or whatever it might be called... Who knows, it might make a lot more women interested in Wikimedia projects (or not?) Finally, let's try to post only things from the past year. Who knows, maybe all those guys' consciousnesses have been raised 3% since we all started talking about these issues and media have started covering it and we might actually have improved things a bit since that 2011 posting :-) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Radio_button_and_female_nude.jpg CM ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons
I agree that offensiveness is in the eye of the beholder. And while there may be all manner of very niche groups who find strange things offensiveness, maybe some people object to seeing refrigerators or reading about cakes, nonetheless we know that there are a lot of widespread categories of offensiveness that generate the bulk of discussions about the inclusion of items on Wikipedia or Commons. What we could do is to have to some system of classification (like the movies) for articles, images, and/or categories indicating that they are potentially offensive for various reasons. Perhaps along similar lines to the content advisories in IMDB, e.g. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/parentalguide?ref_=tt_stry_pg People could then put in their profiles that all classifications are acceptable or them or that these are the classifications they don't want to see (e.g. Sex and Nudity, Gore and Violence, Profanity, etc - obviously our classifications might not be identical to IMDB as we are dealing with different kinds of content but you get the idea). When that person searches Wikipedia or Commons, then those articles, images and categories that they would find offensive are not returned. When a person reads an article containing an offensive-to-them categorised image, it is simply not displayed or some image saying Suppressed at your request (Sex and Nudity). We could possibly bundle such these finer classifications into common collections, e.g. Inappropriate for Children, Suitable for Muslims, or whatever, so for many people it's a simple tick-one-box. For anonymous users or users who have not explicitly set their preferences, rendering of an article or image could first ask This article/image has been tagged as potentially offensive for SuchAndSuch reason, click OK to confirm you want to view it. If they are a logged-in user, it could also offer a link to set their preferences for future use. I note that movies are often made with variants for different countries. Sometimes that's simply a matter of being dubbed into another language but it can also include the deletion (or replacement) of certain scenes or language that would be offensive in those countries. So it is not as if we are reinventing the wheel here, just customising it to Wikipedia. Kerry _ From: gendergap-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:gendergap-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Kaldari Sent: Thursday, 24 July 2014 7:11 AM To: Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participationof women within Wikimedia projects. Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Sexualized environment on Commons Personally, I don't think it's worth having a discussion here about the merits of deleting these images. There's no chance in hell they are going to be deleted from Commons. What I'm more interested in is the locker-room nature of the discussions and how/if this can be addressed, as I think that is actually more likely to dissuade female contributors than the images themselves. Ryan Kaldari On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote: Ryan, thanks for bringing this up for discussion. I've put a lot of thought into the series of photos this comes from over the years, and it's well worth some discussion. I'd like to hear what others think about this. Here is a link to the category for the larger collection; warning, there's lots of nudity and sexual objectification here, so don't click if you don't want to see that: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Nude_portrayals_of_computer_tech nology First, I agree with Ryan that in the (various) deletion discussions I've seen around this and similar topics, there is often a toxic level of childish and offensive comments. I think that's a significant problem, and I don't know what can be done to improve it. Scolding people in those discussions often a backfires, and serves only to amplify the offensive commentary. But silence can imply tacit consent. How should one participate in the discussion, promoting an outcome one believes in, without contributing to or enabling the toxic nature of the discourse? I think I've done a decent job of walking that line in similar discussions, but I'm sure there's a lot of room for better approaches. I would love to hear what has worked for others, here and/or privately. Also, my initial reaction to these images is that they are inherently offensive; my gut reaction is to keep them off Commons. But after thinking it through and reading through a number of deletion discussions, the conclusion I've come to (at least so far) is that the decision to keep them (in spite of the childish and offensive commentary along the way) is the right decision. These strike me as the important points: * We have a collection of more than 20 million images, intended to support a wide diversity of educational projects. Among those 20 million files are a great many that would be offensive to some
