subject:"Re\: \[Gendergap\] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case"

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-02-14 Thread Marie Earley

After thought: Crimestoppers in the UK is anonymous, which would make 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_legal_threats unenforceable, 
https://crimestoppers-uk.org/give-information/give-information-online/ 

Marie

From: eir...@hotmail.com
To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2015 03:48:55 +
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

I don't know of a case of hate speech under UK law that has been brought by a 
non-UK resident. Looking online tends to push you towards information regarding 
extradition, but that's not really what we are talking about.

This week laws against revenge porn came into force within the UK with a 
potential sentence of two years. Since revenge porn is mostly committed online 
then I would have said yes, if the perpetrator is a UK citizen, acting online 
within the UK against someone abroad then I would have thought they could be 
prosecuted by the UK.

This is an article in The Independent about the new law coming into force, the 
last paragraph seems to hint that that would be the case: 
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/revenge-porn-criminalised-what-is-it-and-what-are-the-consequences-10042291.html
 The apparent leaking of nude images of celebrities including Jennifer 
Lawrence and Kate Upton, who had their private accounts hacked and which thrust 
the issue into the limelight, would also be classified as revenge porn.

A couple of other points to note, does 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_legal_threats refer to criminal as 
well as civil law? The UK has no such thing as District Attorneys or pre-trial 
hearings, preliminary hearing etc., so I get lost around US law. Cases in the 
UK are brought by the police and then the file is passed to the Crown 
Prosection Service. The CPS the decides whether to go ahead, it bases that 
decision on (a) is there enough evidence for there to be a reasonable chance of 
conviction, and (b) is the case in the public interest.

I heard about a case some years ago where three men went out for the night, two 
of them got into a physical scrap in he middle of the street which became quite 
violent. The third man made a few attempts to break up the fight. Eventually 
they cooled off and all three went home. No crime was reported, there was no 
threat of legal action by any of the parties, but the whole thing had been 
caught on CCTV. The police arrested the two men and the one of them was jailed 
for attempted murder.

If a concerned member of the public, not necessarily an editor, brought hate 
speech by a British editor to the attention of the police in the UK, then the 
police might arrest that editor and the Crown Prosection Service could bring 
charges using the evidence which is available online. As far as I know it would 
not require any action or any threat of action on the part of the other editor 
concerned.

Marie

Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 21:22:35 +
From: jayen...@gmail.com
To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

David Auerbach in Slate on The Wikipedia Ouroboros:
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2015/02/wikipedia_gamergate_scandal_how_a_bad_source_made_wikipedia_wrong_about.single.html

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 1:40 PM, WereSpielChequers 
werespielchequ...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Marie,
Surely this would cover more than just examples where both parties were in the 
UK? For example if the victim was anywhere in the world but the offender was in 
the UK, wouldn't the UK law apply?

Regards
Jonathan Cardy

On 30 Jan 2015, at 16:46, Marie Earley eir...@hotmail.com wrote:

There is something I thought I should mention as a UK member of this list. 

Hate speech (including online) is illegal in the UK.

When the Bank of England announced that Elizabeth Fry would be dropped from the 
new £5 notes and replaced with Winston Churchill, it meant that there would be 
no women on sterling bank notes (apart from the Queen).

Caroline Criado-Perez successfully campaigned for Jane Austin to be added to 
£10 notes and received threats of rape and death. 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/10207231/Woman-who-campaigned-for-Jane-Austen-bank-note-receives-Twitter-death-threats.html

That instigated an online campaign which resulted in Twitter adding its 
'report' button.

Isabella Sorley, 23, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, tweets included: die you 
worthless piece of crap, go kill yourself and, I've only just got out of 
prison and would happily do more time to see you berried!!

John Nimmo, 25, of South Shields, made references to rape and added:  I will 
find you (smiley face).

Sorley was sentenced to 12 weeks 
in prison, and Nimmo was jailed for 8 
weeks. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25886026 

The law they broke was Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127 

If UK-based Wikipedian 'X' breaches s.127 of the Comms. Act due to something 
they said

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-02-14 Thread Marie Earley

I don't know of a case of hate speech under UK law that has been brought by a 
non-UK resident. Looking online tends to push you towards information regarding 
extradition, but that's not really what we are talking about.

This week laws against revenge porn came into force within the UK with a 
potential sentence of two years. Since revenge porn is mostly committed online 
then I would have said yes, if the perpetrator is a UK citizen, acting online 
within the UK against someone abroad then I would have thought they could be 
prosecuted by the UK.

This is an article in The Independent about the new law coming into force, the 
last paragraph seems to hint that that would be the case: 
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/revenge-porn-criminalised-what-is-it-and-what-are-the-consequences-10042291.html
 The apparent leaking of nude images of celebrities including Jennifer 
Lawrence and Kate Upton, who had their private accounts hacked and which thrust 
the issue into the limelight, would also be classified as revenge porn.

A couple of other points to note, does 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_legal_threats refer to criminal as 
well as civil law? The UK has no such thing as District Attorneys or pre-trial 
hearings, preliminary hearing etc., so I get lost around US law. Cases in the 
UK are brought by the police and then the file is passed to the Crown 
Prosection Service. The CPS the decides whether to go ahead, it bases that 
decision on (a) is there enough evidence for there to be a reasonable chance of 
conviction, and (b) is the case in the public interest.

I heard about a case some years ago where three men went out for the night, two 
of them got into a physical scrap in he middle of the street which became quite 
violent. The third man made a few attempts to break up the fight. Eventually 
they cooled off and all three went home. No crime was reported, there was no 
threat of legal action by any of the parties, but the whole thing had been 
caught on CCTV. The police arrested the two men and the one of them was jailed 
for attempted murder.

If a concerned member of the public, not necessarily an editor, brought hate 
speech by a British editor to the attention of the police in the UK, then the 
police might arrest that editor and the Crown Prosection Service could bring 
charges using the evidence which is available online. As far as I know it would 
not require any action or any threat of action on the part of the other editor 
concerned.

Marie

Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 21:22:35 +
From: jayen...@gmail.com
To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

David Auerbach in Slate on The Wikipedia Ouroboros:
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2015/02/wikipedia_gamergate_scandal_how_a_bad_source_made_wikipedia_wrong_about.single.html

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 1:40 PM, WereSpielChequers 
werespielchequ...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Marie,
Surely this would cover more than just examples where both parties were in the 
UK? For example if the victim was anywhere in the world but the offender was in 
the UK, wouldn't the UK law apply?


Regards
Jonathan Cardy

On 30 Jan 2015, at 16:46, Marie Earley eir...@hotmail.com wrote:




There is something I thought I should mention as a UK member of this list. 

Hate speech (including online) is illegal in the UK.

When the Bank of England announced that Elizabeth Fry would be dropped from the 
new £5 notes and replaced with Winston Churchill, it meant that there would be 
no women on sterling bank notes (apart from the Queen).

Caroline Criado-Perez successfully campaigned for Jane Austin to be added to 
£10 notes and received threats of rape and death. 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/10207231/Woman-who-campaigned-for-Jane-Austen-bank-note-receives-Twitter-death-threats.html

That instigated an online campaign which resulted in Twitter adding its 
'report' button.

Isabella Sorley, 23, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, tweets included: die you 
worthless piece of crap, go kill yourself and, I've only just got out of 
prison and would happily do more time to see you berried!!

John Nimmo, 25, of South Shields, made references to rape and added:  I will 
find you (smiley face).

Sorley was sentenced to 12 weeks 
in prison, and Nimmo was jailed for 8 
weeks. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25886026 

The law they broke was Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127 

If UK-based Wikipedian 'X' breaches s.127 of the Comms. Act due to something 
they said on Wikipedia about UK-based Wikipedian 'Y' then they face criminal 
prosecution and possibly jail. 

The litmus test is whether what they have said is not only 'offensive' but, 
'grossly offensive'. Wikipedia's internal systems and thresholds would make no 
difference to the authorities in the UK. It would be interesting to see what 
the public fall-out would be if Wikipedia decided

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-02-05 Thread Andreas Kolbe

David Auerbach in Slate on The Wikipedia Ouroboros:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2015/02/wikipedia_gamergate_scandal_how_a_bad_source_made_wikipedia_wrong_about.single.html

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 1:40 PM, WereSpielChequers
werespielchequ...@gmail.com wrote:

Hi Marie,

Surely this would cover more than just examples where both parties were in
the UK? For example if the victim was anywhere in the world but the
offender was in the UK, wouldn't the UK law apply?

Regards

Jonathan Cardy

On 30 Jan 2015, at 16:46, Marie Earley eir...@hotmail.com wrote:

There is something I thought I should mention as a UK member of this list.

Hate speech (including online) is illegal in the UK.

When the Bank of England announced that Elizabeth Fry would be dropped
from the new £5 notes and replaced with Winston Churchill, it meant that
there would be no women on sterling bank notes (apart from the Queen).

Caroline Criado-Perez successfully campaigned for Jane Austin to be added
to £10 notes and received threats of rape and death.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/10207231/Woman-who-campaigned-for-Jane-Austen-bank-note-receives-Twitter-death-threats.html

That instigated an online campaign which resulted in Twitter adding its
'report' button.

Isabella Sorley, 23, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, tweets included: die you
worthless piece of crap, go kill yourself and, I've only just got out
of prison and would happily do more time to see you berried!!

John Nimmo, 25, of South Shields, made references to rape and added: I
will find you (smiley face).

Sorley was sentenced to 12 weeks in prison, and Nimmo was jailed for 8
weeks. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25886026

The law they broke was Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127

If UK-based Wikipedian 'X' breaches s.127 of the Comms. Act due to
something they said on Wikipedia about UK-based Wikipedian 'Y' then they
face criminal prosecution and possibly jail.

The litmus test is whether what they have said is not only 'offensive'
but, 'grossly offensive'. Wikipedia's internal systems and thresholds would
make no difference to the authorities in the UK. It would be interesting to
see what the public fall-out would be if Wikipedia decided that no action
should be taken against X whilst the UK jailed him / her.

Marie

--
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 11:41:36 -0500
From: neot...@gmail.com
To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Double standard. Where are all the usual voices protesting about
civility police? Where are all the arbitrators opining that they cannot
set objective standards for language?

Beeblebrox used to have an article about fuck off in his user space. It
didn't get him banned. In fact, he went on to become an administrator and
arbitrator.

In the absence of objective standards, subjective standards are emerging,
based on gender. Using the f-word, or even criticizing male users, is
becoming a male privilege on en.wp. Anyone else who uses the word is
hostile and exhibiting battleground behavior. I must also say I am very
disappointed in GorillaWarfare's role here.

Maybe, just maybe, instead of just dismissing anything that is said by a
woman editor, the arbitration committee should investigate it. I am looking
in particular at this one
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warringdiff=prevoldid=631322169
If it is true, there are a huge number of users recruited on external
sites, who are not there to build an encyclopedia, that will have huge
implications for the survival of women editors on Wikipedia. The
arbitration committee is looking at WP:SPA, they should look at WP:MEAT.
And they should pay attention to who the ringleaders are, not just the
throwaway accounts.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Womendiff=nextoldid=10928257
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Womendiff=10938964oldid=10936831
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Womendiff=10952260oldid=10951344
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Womendiff=10991140oldid=10979378

But, as has been pointed out on the current RFC,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Harassment#RfC:_should_the_policy_extend_harassment_to_include_posting_ANY_other_accounts_on_ANY_other_websites.3F
that would change the WP:OUTING policy to prohibit all mention of outside
accounts, including Reddit Men's Rights and Reddit Gamergate, trying to
address the issues without being able to talk openly about the evidence is
difficult.

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 11:05 PM, Marie Earley eir...@hotmail.com wrote:

I don't know a lot about this case, but taking a cursory look at the
diffs

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-02-04 Thread WereSpielChequers

Hi Marie,

Surely this would cover more than just examples where both parties were in the
UK? For example if the victim was anywhere in the world but the offender was in
the UK, wouldn't the UK law apply?

Regards

Jonathan Cardy

On 30 Jan 2015, at 16:46, Marie Earley eir...@hotmail.com wrote:

There is something I thought I should mention as a UK member of this list.

Hate speech (including online) is illegal in the UK.

When the Bank of England announced that Elizabeth Fry would be dropped from
the new £5 notes and replaced with Winston Churchill, it meant that there
would be no women on sterling bank notes (apart from the Queen).

Caroline Criado-Perez successfully campaigned for Jane Austin to be added to
£10 notes and received threats of rape and death.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/10207231/Woman-who-campaigned-for-Jane-Austen-bank-note-receives-Twitter-death-threats.html

That instigated an online campaign which resulted in Twitter adding its
'report' button.

Isabella Sorley, 23, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, tweets included: die you
worthless piece of crap, go kill yourself and, I've only just got out of
prison and would happily do more time to see you berried!!

John Nimmo, 25, of South Shields, made references to rape and added: I will
find you (smiley face).

Sorley was sentenced to 12 weeks in prison, and Nimmo was jailed for 8 weeks.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25886026

The law they broke was Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127

If UK-based Wikipedian 'X' breaches s.127 of the Comms. Act due to something
they said on Wikipedia about UK-based Wikipedian 'Y' then they face criminal
prosecution and possibly jail.

The litmus test is whether what they have said is not only 'offensive' but,
'grossly offensive'. Wikipedia's internal systems and thresholds would make
no difference to the authorities in the UK. It would be interesting to see
what the public fall-out would be if Wikipedia decided that no action should
be taken against X whilst the UK jailed him / her.

Marie

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 11:41:36 -0500
From: neot...@gmail.com
To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Double standard. Where are all the usual voices protesting about civility
police? Where are all the arbitrators opining that they cannot set
objective standards for language?

Beeblebrox used to have an article about fuck off in his user space. It
didn't get him banned. In fact, he went on to become an administrator and
arbitrator.

Maybe, just maybe, instead of just dismissing anything that is said by a
woman editor, the arbitration committee should investigate it. I am looking
in particular at this one
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warringdiff=prevoldid=631322169
If it is true, there are a huge number of users recruited on external sites,
who are not there to build an encyclopedia, that will have huge implications
for the survival of women editors on Wikipedia. The arbitration committee is
looking at WP:SPA, they should look at WP:MEAT. And they should pay attention
to who the ringleaders are, not just the throwaway accounts.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Womendiff=nextoldid=10928257

https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Womendiff=10938964oldid=10936831

https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Womendiff=10952260oldid=10951344

https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Womendiff=10991140oldid=10979378

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 11:05 PM, Marie Earley eir...@hotmail.com wrote:
I don't know a lot about this case, but taking a cursory look at the diffs...

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gamergate_controversydiff=prevoldid=628547686

...presumably an excessive edit is a derogatrory way of saying a single
large edit. In which case I would probably have said the same

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-31 Thread Sarah (SV)

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Marie Earley eir...@hotmail.com wrote:

Yes, no action from ArbCom or however, followed by a criminal conviction.
Quotes from the judge in the criminal trial appearing in the media
alongside quotes from those on-wiki who just said, Closing this... no
action... trivial... this isn't a matter for administrators... etc.

Perhaps even a judge who expresses surprise and/or disappointment at a
lack of action from Wikipedia, a headline along the lines of: Judge
accuses Wikipedia for failing to support victim of hate speech.

There is also the crime of defamation which is also a more serious offence
under UK law than it is under US law.
US -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law#Criminal_defamation
UK - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation_Act_2013

Marie

With reference to
Marie and Daniel's emails
, an
d
to Maia's email under a different subject line – where she
discusses
the US cyber-stalking and cyber-harassment laws
http://www.ncsl.org/research/telecommunications-and-information-technology/cyberstalking-and-cyberharassment-laws.aspx#overview
– one difficulty for Wikipedians is whether they would be blocked from
editing
if they were to invoke the law in their defence. (This assumes the editor
causing the problem hasn't been banned, in which case I can't imagine that
NLT would ever be applied.)

Wikipedia:No legal threats
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_legal_threats
(NLT)
says: If you make legal threats or take legal action over a Wikipedia
dispute, you may be blocked from editing so that the matter is not
exacerbated through other channels.

This is arguably more likely to have an impact on women. People aren't
blocked from Twitter or Facebook for using the law to defend themselves,
and women are generally encouraged to seek legal help rather than deal with
bad online situations alone. NLT should be updated to distinguish between
invoking the law merely to intimidate and invoking it as a legitimate
defence, though it would need careful wording.

Sarah
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-30 Thread Daniel and Elizabeth Case

The litmus test is whether what they have said is not only 'offensive' but, 
'grossly offensive'. Wikipedia's internal systems and thresholds would make 
no difference to the authorities in the UK. It would be interesting to see 
what the public fall-out would be if Wikipedia decided that no action should 
be taken against X whilst the UK jailed him / her.

Well, there’s this page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Threats_of_violence
which never became policy (probably because, it seems, people discussed it more 
in light of threats of suicide rather than threats to others). But it may be 
time to revisit that.
I assume, in the hypothetical you’re talking about, the question would be 
whether someone was punished in real life for threats made on-wiki that 
resulted in no action from the ArbCom? Or from anyone? In the former, yes, the 
public fallout would be interesting; in the latter, it would depend on whether 
anyone with the power to take action knew.
I do recall some past cases, once described on the now-deleted “List of banned 
users”, where the trigger for the formal ban (as opposed to the never-lifted 
indefinite block) was a user threatening violence against someone (usually via 
their latest sock).
Of course, if someone were to be incarcerated in real life as a result of their 
on-wiki threats, any action after that other than blocking the account to 
prevent some hacker from making use of it would really be superfluous.
Daniel Case___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-30 Thread LB

Marie I always find your replies so interesting. Glad you share.
On Jan 30, 2015 5:46 AM, Marie Earley eir...@hotmail.com wrote:

There is something I thought I should mention as a UK member of this list.

Hate speech (including online) is illegal in the UK.

That instigated an online campaign which resulted in Twitter adding its
'report' button.

John Nimmo, 25, of South Shields, made references to rape and added: I
will find you (smiley face).

Sorley was sentenced to 12 weeks in prison, and Nimmo was jailed for 8
weeks. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25886026

The law they broke was Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127

If UK-based Wikipedian 'X' breaches s.127 of the Comms. Act due to
something they said on Wikipedia about UK-based Wikipedian 'Y' then they
face criminal prosecution and possibly jail.

Marie

--
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 11:41:36 -0500
From: neot...@gmail.com
To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Double standard. Where are all the usual voices protesting about
civility police? Where are all the arbitrators opining that they cannot
set objective standards for language?

Beeblebrox used to have an article about fuck off in his user space. It
didn't get him banned. In fact, he went on to become an administrator and
arbitrator.

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 11:05 PM, Marie Earley eir...@hotmail.com wrote:

I don't know a lot about this case, but taking a cursory look at the
diffs...

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gamergate_controversydiff=prevoldid=628547686

...presumably an excessive edit is a derogatrory way of saying a single
large edit. In which case I would probably have said the same as this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gamergate_controversydiff=prevoldid=628548723

To be feminist or to not be feminist...

I once read about a mother who went into a toy shop with her little girl

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-30 Thread Marie Earley

There is something I thought I should mention as a UK member of this list. 

Hate speech (including online) is illegal in the UK.

When the Bank of England announced that Elizabeth Fry would be dropped from the 
new £5 notes and replaced with Winston Churchill, it meant that there would be 
no women on sterling bank notes (apart from the Queen).

Caroline Criado-Perez successfully campaigned for Jane Austin to be added to 
£10 notes and received threats of rape and death. 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/10207231/Woman-who-campaigned-for-Jane-Austen-bank-note-receives-Twitter-death-threats.html

That instigated an online campaign which resulted in Twitter adding its 
'report' button.

Isabella Sorley, 23, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, tweets included: die you 
worthless piece of crap, go kill yourself and, I've only just got out of 
prison and would happily do more time to see you berried!!

John Nimmo, 25, of South Shields, made references to rape and added:  I will 
find you (smiley face).

Sorley was sentenced to 12 weeks 
in prison, and Nimmo was jailed for 8 
weeks. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25886026 

The law they broke was Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127 

If UK-based Wikipedian 'X' breaches s.127 of the Comms. Act due to something 
they said on Wikipedia about UK-based Wikipedian 'Y' then they face criminal 
prosecution and possibly jail. 

The litmus test is whether what they have said is not only 'offensive' but, 
'grossly offensive'. Wikipedia's internal systems and thresholds would make no 
difference to the authorities in the UK. It would be interesting to see what 
the public fall-out would be if Wikipedia decided that no action should be 
taken against X whilst the UK jailed him / her.

Marie


Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 11:41:36 -0500
From: neot...@gmail.com
To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Double standard.  Where are all the usual voices protesting about civility 
police?  Where are all the arbitrators opining that they cannot set objective 
standards for language?

Beeblebrox used to have an article about fuck off in his user space.  It 
didn't get him banned. In fact, he went on to become an administrator and 
arbitrator. 

In the absence of objective standards, subjective standards are emerging, based 
on gender.  Using the f-word, or even criticizing male users, is becoming a 
male privilege on en.wp.  Anyone else who uses the word is hostile and 
exhibiting battleground behavior. I must also say I am very disappointed in 
GorillaWarfare's role here.

Maybe, just maybe, instead of just dismissing anything that is said by a woman 
editor, the arbitration committee should investigate it. I am looking in 
particular at this one 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warringdiff=prevoldid=631322169
 If it is true, there are a huge number of users recruited on external sites, 
who are not there to build an encyclopedia, that will have huge implications 
for the survival of women editors on Wikipedia. The arbitration committee is 
looking at WP:SPA, they should look at WP:MEAT. And they should pay attention 
to who the ringleaders are, not just the throwaway accounts.  
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Womendiff=nextoldid=10928257
 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Womendiff=10938964oldid=10936831
 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Womendiff=10952260oldid=10951344
 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Womendiff=10991140oldid=10979378
  

But, as has been pointed out on the current RFC, 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Harassment#RfC:_should_the_policy_extend_harassment_to_include_posting_ANY_other_accounts_on_ANY_other_websites.3F
 that would change the WP:OUTING policy to prohibit all mention of 
outside accounts, including Reddit Men's Rights and Reddit Gamergate, trying 
to address the issues without being able to talk openly about the evidence is 
difficult.

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 11:05 PM, Marie Earley eir...@hotmail.com wrote:



I don't know a lot about this case, but taking a cursory look at the diffs...

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gamergate_controversydiff=prevoldid=628547686
 

...presumably an excessive edit is a derogatrory way of saying a single 
large edit. In which case I would probably have said the same as this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gamergate_controversydiff=prevoldid=628548723
 

To be feminist or to not be feminist...

I once read about a mother who went into a toy shop with her little girl. She 
was walking towards the check-out with a toy fire truck and some Lego when she 
was stopped by a member of staff who pointed out that the store had dolls. The 
mother

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-27 Thread Neotarf

Double standard. Where are all the usual voices protesting about civility
police? Where are all the arbitrators opining that they cannot set
objective standards for language?

Beeblebrox used to have an article about fuck off in his user space. It
didn't get him banned. In fact, he went on to become an administrator and
arbitrator.

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 11:05 PM, Marie Earley eir...@hotmail.com wrote:

I don't know a lot about this case, but taking a cursory look at the
diffs...

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gamergate_controversydiff=prevoldid=628547686

...presumably an excessive edit is a derogatrory way of saying a single
large edit. In which case I would probably have said the same as this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gamergate_controversydiff=prevoldid=628548723

To be feminist or to not be feminist...

I once read about a mother who went into a toy shop with her little girl.
She was walking towards the check-out with a toy fire truck and some Lego
when she was stopped by a member of staff who pointed out that the store
had dolls. The mother said that her daughter didn't like dolls, that she
likes trucks. She was about to move off again when the staff member pointed
out that the store sold pastel Lego (as opposed to the primary coloured
bucket of Lego that she had picked up). I'm sure she didn't think of
herself as a feminist until that moment.

I find that most people who join feminist groups / gender gap mailing list
etc. never thought of themselves as feminists until they had a Lego
moment.

My Lego moment was reading this article:
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/fashion-news/the-wag-wannabes-949827
about a 19 year-old who was hoping to become the wife or girlfriend of a
footballer (soccer player).
The lifestyle is amazing. Nice house, expensive cars. Wherever
footballers go they are recognised and
have people looking up to them. They know they can be with anyone - it's
a privilege when they pick you.

Marie

Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 19:24:12 -0500
From: carolmoor...@verizon.net
To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

On 1/25/2015 6:17 PM, Nathan wrote:

I think the lesson it sends is that a righteous cause is not a defense
against accusations of disruption, nor a license to violate other
policies. I'm sure that among the restricted people are those with
positions I'd support along with many others, but that doesn't put
their behavior above reproach. Tony Sidaway was hardly the paragon of
a calm and thoughtful administrator - insightful as he often was,
there was a reason he was fired as a clerk and barred from simply
requesting his bit back.
The problem being that ArbCom is so political that most members see
editors they dislike/disagree with on issues/content as disruptive even
if their disruption is minor compared to that of the editors they feel
more sympatico with. And of course if the community (i.e., gangs of
editors who are allies) decide to target someone

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-26 Thread Fæ

Thanks for the link and explanation. It fooled me then, I saw it as
simple bigotry and stopped reading about it, or anything that Tarc had
to say from there on.

I agree with your comment about being cautious about sarcasm or
reductio ad absurdum on the internet. Bigoted language as a joke,
parody or rhetorical trick is not just prone to back-firing but when
at this level of nastiness, is going to stick, and be incredibly hard
to return from.

Fae

On 26 January 2015 at 18:15, Neotarf neot...@gmail.com wrote:
 There is a thread on the PD talk page that will explain it, but I can't seem
 to find the original.
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning_naming_dispute/Proposed_decision#The_Tarc_fiasco

 Tarc was using a rhetorical device called reductio ad absurdum
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum

 It always backfires on the internet, since no one can tell the difference
 between a real bigot and someone pretending to be a bigot in order to mock
 bigotry.  I would like to think I'm good at spotting sarcasm and
 tongue-in-cheek statements, but I was fooled completely.  I remember
 thinking that Tarc's political views were not what I had thought them to be.
 But as it turned out, he was the same old Tarc after all.  The tactic might
 have had the desired effect, and who knows, maybe tilted the case in the
 direction that Tarc had intended.  But people don't like to be fooled, this
 kind of thing usually ends in hostility.

 On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote:



 On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 3:43 AM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:

 Tarc, I felt your lipstick on a pig comment about a transexual was
 not just disgusting, but was a key example of why we needed a WM-LGBT
 user group to both highlight and gradually improve a hostile culture
 on Wikimedia projects that appeared to allow blatantly anti-LGBT
 attitudes and language on its projects under the guise of being a
 joke or teasing.

 I stopped following any of the crap related to your defamatory
 language, so if you apologised I missed it. If you did apologize,
 could you give a link to it, or if not then maybe a thread here or
 Wikimedia-l might be a good way of building some bridges with members
 of minority groups that you took part in driving away from Wikipedia
 through comments like this?

 Thanks,
 Fae

 Hi Fae, Tarc wrote during or after the Chelsea Manning case that his
 comments had been a false-flag operation, intended to shine a spotlight on
 transphobia. He acknowledged that this was not a good way to do it, and as I
 recall he apologized.

 Sarah

 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
 visit:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
 visit:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-26 Thread Katherine Casey

Fae, this is really very off-topic for this thread at this point. Would
mind going off-list if you want to discuss personal history with others?

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 2:44 PM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:

 I suggest that as a supporter and administrator of a website that
 labels me as a faggot, and a participant and advocate of another
 website that has been home to trolling me with homophobic language for
 years, you avoid finding silly reasons to pick tiny holes in my text.

 I am in a same sex marriage recognized by UK law. Being called /a gay/
 is the least of my worries. In comparison your access to OTRS and
 personal oversighted material on Wikimedia projects worries me and
 others greatly.

 Fae

 On 26 January 2015 at 19:02, Alison Cassidy coot...@mac.com wrote:
 
  On Jan 26, 2015, at 2:43 AM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  Tarc, I felt your lipstick on a pig comment about a transexual was
  not just disgusting, but was a key example of why we needed a WM-LGBT
  user group to both highlight and gradually improve a hostile culture
  on Wikimedia projects that appeared to allow blatantly anti-LGBT
  attitudes and language on its projects under the guise of being a
  joke or teasing.
 
  Fæ, please don't refer to someone as a transsexual; it's objectifying
 and demeaning. Imagine someone calling you a gay - doesn't that just
 sound *wrong*? Adjective, not noun.
 
  -- Allie
  ___
  Gendergap mailing list
  Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
  To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
 visit:
  https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



 --
 fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
 visit:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-26 Thread Alison Cassidy


 On Jan 26, 2015, at 2:43 AM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Tarc, I felt your lipstick on a pig comment about a transexual was
 not just disgusting, but was a key example of why we needed a WM-LGBT
 user group to both highlight and gradually improve a hostile culture
 on Wikimedia projects that appeared to allow blatantly anti-LGBT
 attitudes and language on its projects under the guise of being a
 joke or teasing.

Fæ, please don't refer to someone as a transsexual; it's objectifying and 
demeaning. Imagine someone calling you a gay - doesn't that just sound 
*wrong*? Adjective, not noun.

-- Allie
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-25 Thread Andreas Kolbe

Press coverage is widening:

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/23/wikipedia-bans-editors-from-gender-related-articles-amid-gamergate-controversy

http://internet.gawker.com/wikipedia-purged-a-group-of-feminist-editors-because-of-1681463331

http://pando.com/2015/01/23/wikipedia-tacitly-endorses-gamergate-by-blocking-its-opponents-from-editing-gender-related-articles/

http://www.themarysue.com/wikipedia-gamergate/

http://www.volkskrant.nl/tech/hoe-gamergate-wikipedia-blijft-vervuilen~a3835403/

http://derstandard.at/210843264/Eintrag-zu-GamerGate-Wikipedia-sperrt-feministische-Nutzer

These articles are getting thousands of tweets.

It's unfortunate that the original Guardian article, based on Mark
Bernstein's blog post, contains a few inaccuracies that are now being
repeated. The broad thrust of the article however remains correct, as Tarc
says.

What this illustrates is the potential power of a good blog post for
raising public awareness of gender gap issues in Wikipedia. The recent
Anitaborg piece did well in social media too:

http://anitaborg.org/news/blog/how-to-edit-wikipedia-lessons-from-a-female-contributor/

Really, there is a desperate need for an off-wiki site documenting,
explaining and publicising these issues.

Andreas



On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Tarc . t...@hotmail.com wrote:

 I just wanted to bring up a point wrt but cannot ban the Guardian for
 bad journalism below, there are already efforts underway on the
 Gamergate talk page by a single-purpose account to do just that.  The
 argument is that since this Guardian article is so wrong (and it really
 isn't, just in minor details), therefore the Guardian should be stripped as
 a source in the Gamergate article.

 These are the types of antics that the 2nd wave of 8chan/redditors are
 going to be pulling, once some of us have been swept away.

 -t

 --
 Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 09:26:47 -0500
 From: slowki...@gmail.com
 To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 Subject: Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

 well, they did not revdel it.
 arbcom can drive the  discussion off wiki,
 but cannot ban the Guardian for bad journalism
 certain account behaviors are being favored
 you should expect to see a lot more of those behaviors in the future

 this will necessitate a lot of wiki-splaining

 thank-you arbcom for firing up every up coming feminist editathon
 you may not care how how you are perceived,
 but the negative blowback will tarnish all of wikimedia

 On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 12:06 AM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org
 wrote:

 The rediculous thing is that none of the people defending that article
 were 'feminists'. They were just defending the mainstream point of view
 from an endless onslaught of 8channers. The feminist point view isn't even
 represented in the article.

 On Jan 23, 2015, at 7:14 PM, J Hayes slowki...@gmail.com wrote:


 http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/23/wikipedia-bans-editors-from-gender-related-articles-amid-gamergate-controversy


 http://internet.gawker.com/wikipedia-purged-a-group-of-feminist-editors-because-of-1681463331/+cushac


 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
 visit:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
 visit:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



 ___ Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences,
 including unsubscribing, please visit:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
 visit:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-25 Thread Carol Moore dc


On 1/25/2015 1:03 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote:


After reviewing the Arbcom case, I don't even know who got the idea 
that any of the contributing editors are feminist, per se. No one even 
mentions the word, except once, when describing a subject that was 
slandered in the gamer gate article(s).
I read the article and some discussion in the past. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamergate_controversy
And skimmed evidence and current proposal (all that convoluted 
info/opinion that makes Arbitrations so difficult).


Off hand this is what I think about media labeling it feminist:

*Obviously the quoted Mark Bernstein's labeling sanctioned editors as 
feminists helped frame it; looks like he might have brought this to the 
media.


*Reading the article in its current state it's clear that the whole 
Gamergate movement is a bunch of misogynists who ignore real big 
corporate ethics issues while picking on small mostly female efforts.  
Anyone fighting against imposing the Gamergate view point obvious is 
defacto acting to advance the feminist cause, even if they don't 
consider themselves feminists. (Not that it was entirely clear to me who 
all the pro-feminist editors were, including the banned 5; that would 
take too much research.)


*I did note that two editors who were very supportive of ending 
disruptions at GGTF and the banning of pro-GGTF editors took opposite 
views on gamergate - and both got site banned.




___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-25 Thread Nathan

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com
 wrote:


 After reviewing the Arbcom case, I don't even know who got the idea that
 any of the contributing editors are feminist, per se. No one even mentions
 the word, except once, when describing a subject that was slandered in
 the gamer gate article(s).


 Hi Sarah, I think the point is that editors who were defending the rights
 and privacy of the women involved in Gamergate are being sanctioned because
 (I assume) they did it in some sense inappropriately, perhaps too
 aggressively, I don't know. (I don't know the details.)

 In that sense it looks like a repeat of the gender gap task force
 decision. In the latter, those trying to stop disruption were sanctioned
 even harder than those causing it.

 The message those cases send is that, if you're trying to protect women's
 interests, you have to creep around and not stick your neck out. The
 Chelsea Manning case had similar problems, and Sceptre recently expressed
 the same concern about the Sexology case.

 Another aspect of this is that we've been undermining admins for years so
 that they (we) are reluctant to act at an early stage to nip things in the
 bud. As Tony Sidaway wrote: The administrator corps must be coaxed out
 of their inappropriate and destructive timidity. I was glad to see the
 ArbCom's proposed decision thank the admins who have worked on this.

 Sarah



I think the lesson it sends is that a righteous cause is not a defense
against accusations of disruption, nor a license to violate other policies.
I'm sure that among the restricted people are those with positions I'd
support along with many others, but that doesn't put their behavior above
reproach. Tony Sidaway was hardly the paragon of a calm and thoughtful
administrator - insightful as he often was, there was a reason he was fired
as a clerk and barred from simply requesting his bit back.
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-25 Thread Andreas Kolbe

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Note: most of the in trouble editor's aren't that productive at
 contributing feminist content to Wikipedia. I have interacted with only
 four of them - Black Kite, Future Perfect at Sunrise, TarainDC and Bilby -
 only one is a female in real life and I know her from GLAM editing
 projects. She is the only one that I know who has actively edited feminist
 topics prior to this. I actually consider Bilby an ally, but, I have never
 heard him or any of the other editors blatantly identify themselves as
 feminists.



Black Kite, Future Perfect at Sunrise and Bilby are not mentioned on the
Proposed decision page, so I don't see how they are in trouble.

The Guardian article is talking about the five editors dubbed the five
horsemen by the Gamergate movement, e.g. here:

http://wiki.gamergate.me/index.php?title=Projects:Operation_5_Horsemen

They're Ryulong, NorthBySouthBaranof, Tarc, TheRedPenOfDoom, and TaraInDC.

As things stand,

-- Ryulong, Tarc and TaraInDC are currently heading for topic bans;
-- TheRedPenOfDoom and NorthBySouthBaranof are being admonished.

A potential downside of this decision is that in future, fewer established
editors will be eager to deal with situations like this, as they can expect
that it will ultimately result in their being drawn into an arbcom case and
sanctioned in some way.

Andreas
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-25 Thread Sydney Poore

I largely agree with Sarah.

After several years taking a break from using the Checkuser tool, in early
January I decided to actively join the the team again. So, I read all the
active ArbCom cases to familarize myself with the current controversies on
Wikipedia. During my reading of the GamerGate controversy evidence,
workshop, and proposed decison I never saw this case as people who were
feminists or strong advocates for eliminating systemic bias in Wikipedia.
So, I was shocked to see it being reported that ArbCom was purging
feminists!

This is not the first dispute that has been imported into Wikipedia
English, but it is one of the biggest and worst. Right now the people who
have reported on GamerGate in the media for months are reporting on the
ArbCom case. Some of these people have pretty entrenched points of view.
This is true of both sides.

The issue of off site harassment that is happening to Wikipedia editors. is
something that need to be addressed in a broader way and not put on ArbCom to
fix because that is beyond their ability to investigate and resolve. If you
are being harassed take Sarah's advice and take a break and find something
off or on wiki to do that feeds your soul.. Life is too short to let
Wikipedia ruin your life.


There are some reasonable people who are working to keep violations of BLP
out of the articles and off the talk pages and stop the constant fighting.
These people are not getting sanctioned. I truly appreciate the work that
they are doing in the face of the harassment and negative publicity in the
media.


Sydney

Sydney Poore
User:FloNight
Wikipedian in Residence
at Cochrane Collaboration

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com
wrote:

 I am now on digest mode with this mailing list. The traffic is often too
 much for me and the voice of this list is frustrating for me
 sometimes..so... remember that please :)
 ---

 I have been asked to share my thoughts by many people this morning on the
 internet, here they are:

 I have been editing Wikipedia for ten years and i have no clue what has
 been going on with the feminist/gamergate thing. As one of the more well
 known female editors i have cut back heavily on my involvement after last
 year. I don't know any of the editors, personally, who went to court but
 I have seen this stuff happen to both sides in men's rights articles in the
 past.

 After reviewing the Arbcom case, I don't even know who got the idea that
 any of the contributing editors are feminist, per se. No one even mentions
 the word, except once, when describing a subject that was slandered in
 the gamer gate article(s).

 I also don't think that the edits made to the article are overwhelmingly
 feminist in nature. It appears to be just a bunch of people editing the
 Wikipedia article to protect it from being a hot mess of 4chan junk.

 Note: most of the in trouble editor's aren't that productive at
 contributing feminist content to Wikipedia. I have interacted with only
 four of them - Black Kite, Future Perfect at Sunrise, TarainDC and Bilby -
 only one is a female in real life and I know her from GLAM editing
 projects. She is the only one that I know who has actively edited feminist
 topics prior to this. I actually consider Bilby an ally, but, I have never
 heard him or any of the other editors blatantly identify themselves as
 feminists.

 From what I know, only one of the editors on the entire trial list
 identifies out as a female.

 So, it appears a bunch of editors trying to keep the article clean had to
 run through the gauntlet. I don't think the end of the world has come to
 any of their lives - they have plenty of other subjects of interest to keep
 them busy on Wikipedia.

 I also think people invest *too much* into Wikipedia to where it's what
 they live for..per se. I see a lot of that in this case, and many others
 that go to court on Wikipedia. I stopped participating on Wikipedia when
 it screwed up my personal life so much, and I lost sleep over it. So...
 that's my advice to anyone involved in that Arbcom case :) Go on vacation
 and get another hobby and edit Wikipedia when you feel like it. It isn't
 life. It's just an encyclopedia.

 Sarah

 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
 visit:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-25 Thread Sarah Stierch

I am now on digest mode with this mailing list. The traffic is often too
much for me and the voice of this list is frustrating for me
sometimes..so... remember that please :)
---

I have been asked to share my thoughts by many people this morning on the
internet, here they are:

I have been editing Wikipedia for ten years and i have no clue what has
been going on with the feminist/gamergate thing. As one of the more well
known female editors i have cut back heavily on my involvement after last
year. I don't know any of the editors, personally, who went to court but
I have seen this stuff happen to both sides in men's rights articles in the
past.

After reviewing the Arbcom case, I don't even know who got the idea that
any of the contributing editors are feminist, per se. No one even mentions
the word, except once, when describing a subject that was slandered in
the gamer gate article(s).

I also don't think that the edits made to the article are overwhelmingly
feminist in nature. It appears to be just a bunch of people editing the
Wikipedia article to protect it from being a hot mess of 4chan junk.

Note: most of the in trouble editor's aren't that productive at
contributing feminist content to Wikipedia. I have interacted with only
four of them - Black Kite, Future Perfect at Sunrise, TarainDC and Bilby -
only one is a female in real life and I know her from GLAM editing
projects. She is the only one that I know who has actively edited feminist
topics prior to this. I actually consider Bilby an ally, but, I have never
heard him or any of the other editors blatantly identify themselves as
feminists.

From what I know, only one of the editors on the entire trial list
identifies out as a female.

So, it appears a bunch of editors trying to keep the article clean had to
run through the gauntlet. I don't think the end of the world has come to
any of their lives - they have plenty of other subjects of interest to keep
them busy on Wikipedia.

I also think people invest *too much* into Wikipedia to where it's what
they live for..per se. I see a lot of that in this case, and many others
that go to court on Wikipedia. I stopped participating on Wikipedia when
it screwed up my personal life so much, and I lost sleep over it. So...
that's my advice to anyone involved in that Arbcom case :) Go on vacation
and get another hobby and edit Wikipedia when you feel like it. It isn't
life. It's just an encyclopedia.

Sarah
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-25 Thread Tarc .

I just wanted to bring up a point wrt but cannot ban the Guardian for bad 
journalism below, there are already efforts underway on the Gamergate talk 
page by a single-purpose account to do just that.  The argument is that since 
this Guardian article is so wrong (and it really isn't, just in minor 
details), therefore the Guardian should be stripped as a source in the 
Gamergate article.
These are the types of antics that the 2nd wave of 8chan/redditors are going to 
be pulling, once some of us have been swept away.
-t

Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 09:26:47 -0500
From: slowki...@gmail.com
To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

well, they did not revdel it.
arbcom can drive the  discussion off wiki,
but cannot ban the Guardian for bad journalism
certain account behaviors are being favored
you should expect to see a lot more of those behaviors in the future

this will necessitate a lot of wiki-splaining

thank-you arbcom for firing up every up coming feminist editathon
you may not care how how you are perceived, 
but the negative blowback will tarnish all of wikimedia

On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 12:06 AM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote:
The rediculous thing is that none of the people defending that article were 
'feminists'. They were just defending the mainstream point of view from an 
endless onslaught of 8channers. The feminist point view isn't even represented 
in the article.
On Jan 23, 2015, at 7:14 PM, J Hayes slowki...@gmail.com wrote:

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/23/wikipedia-bans-editors-from-gender-related-articles-amid-gamergate-controversy

http://internet.gawker.com/wikipedia-purged-a-group-of-feminist-editors-because-of-1681463331/+cushac



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap  
  ___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-25 Thread Ryan Kaldari

I'm sure it's hard to remain calm and thoughtful when 8chan is running 24/7
discussion threads to:
1. Strategize on how to subvert the consensus process to take over the
article
2. Target Wikipedia editors for doxxing and harassment so that they will
stop defending the article

The assault was literally relentless. I think Ryulong nearly had a nervous
breakdown and the other editors didn't fair much better. They all deserve a
barnstar and some kittens, IMO...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ryulong
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TaraInDC
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TheRedPenOfDoom
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tarc
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:NorthBySouthBaranof

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 3:17 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:



 On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com
 wrote:


 After reviewing the Arbcom case, I don't even know who got the idea that
 any of the contributing editors are feminist, per se. No one even mentions
 the word, except once, when describing a subject that was slandered in
 the gamer gate article(s).


 Hi Sarah, I think the point is that editors who were defending the
 rights and privacy of the women involved in Gamergate are being sanctioned
 because (I assume) they did it in some sense inappropriately, perhaps too
 aggressively, I don't know. (I don't know the details.)

 In that sense it looks like a repeat of the gender gap task force
 decision. In the latter, those trying to stop disruption were sanctioned
 even harder than those causing it.

 The message those cases send is that, if you're trying to protect women's
 interests, you have to creep around and not stick your neck out. The
 Chelsea Manning case had similar problems, and Sceptre recently expressed
 the same concern about the Sexology case.

 Another aspect of this is that we've been undermining admins for years so
 that they (we) are reluctant to act at an early stage to nip things in the
 bud. As Tony Sidaway wrote: The administrator corps must be coaxed out
 of their inappropriate and destructive timidity. I was glad to see the
 ArbCom's proposed decision thank the admins who have worked on this.

 Sarah



 I think the lesson it sends is that a righteous cause is not a defense
 against accusations of disruption, nor a license to violate other policies.
 I'm sure that among the restricted people are those with positions I'd
 support along with many others, but that doesn't put their behavior above
 reproach. Tony Sidaway was hardly the paragon of a calm and thoughtful
 administrator - insightful as he often was, there was a reason he was fired
 as a clerk and barred from simply requesting his bit back.

 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
 visit:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-25 Thread Carol Moore dc


On 1/25/2015 6:17 PM, Nathan wrote:




I think the lesson it sends is that a righteous cause is not a defense 
against accusations of disruption, nor a license to violate other 
policies. I'm sure that among the restricted people are those with 
positions I'd support along with many others, but that doesn't put 
their behavior above reproach. Tony Sidaway was hardly the paragon of 
a calm and thoughtful administrator - insightful as he often was, 
there was a reason he was fired as a clerk and barred from simply 
requesting his bit back.
The problem being that ArbCom is so political that most members see 
editors they dislike/disagree with on issues/content as disruptive even 
if their disruption is minor compared to that of the editors they feel 
more sympatico with.  And of course if the community (i.e.,  gangs of 
editors who are allies) decide to target someone it's just easier 
politically to sanction those persons than not. And if they have a lot 
of supporters it is safer NOT to sanction them.


This issue was very clear in GGTF arbitration where a few people were 
targeted by most posters, over and over for the same issues, at least 
til the end when an Arbitrator added a couple more needing sanctions.  
It's less clear in Gamergate because there are more participants being 
targeted by many more participants on many different issues.


CM

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-25 Thread Tarc .





   Suppose I should say a brief something since some of the posts here talk 
about me.   I have been caustic and acerbic at the Wikipedia over the years, 
though in fits and starts I am trying to take it down a few notches. So, yea, 
I'm quite aware that I'm not the best poster-child for any sort of movement or 
change or whatnot.  I dived into Gamergate after hearing about some of the 
really awful things that were being said about Zoe Quinn elsewhere, thinking 
(correctly) that her Wiki bio was going to be a harassment magnet.  As far as I 
am concerned, there is no debate; if one identifies as a pro-Gamergater, than 
that one stands side-by-side with the harassment that was done under the 
hashtag. I did not want to allow these people to direct the narrative of the 
Gamergate article.
   So, yes, sometimes one loses one's cool when dealing with dirtbags from 
8chan/reddit.  However, it is a shame that we who kept the hordes at bay, while 
being harassed by 8chan/reddit and hell, harassed by Jimmy Wales himself for a 
time til his eyes belatedly opened, were not cut a little more slack. We were 
doing something right (with using some wrong words/tone at times) and got the 
same treatment as a bunch of throwaway accounts.  
   That is the narrative that the mainstream media seems to be running with, 
and while it isn't accurate for them to say feminists and women were banned, 
they are still correctly portraying the WIkipedia's Arbcom as doing a pretty 
bad thing here.
-t

  ___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-25 Thread Carol Moore dc

I think in both your case and Devil's Advocate (even though you take 
opposite positions) there may have been annoyance that you both very 
vocally took the wrong position on GGTF on the arbitration talk pages 
so this may be at least partial payback...


On 1/25/2015 8:12 PM, Tarc . wrote:


   Suppose I should say a brief something since some of the posts here 
talk about me.   I have been caustic and acerbic at the Wikipedia over 
the years, though in fits and starts I am trying to take it down a few 
notches. So, yea, I'm quite aware that I'm not the best poster-child 
for any sort of movement or change or whatnot.  I dived into Gamergate 
after hearing about some of the really awful things that were being 
said about Zoe Quinn elsewhere, thinking (correctly) that her Wiki bio 
was going to be a harassment magnet.  As far as I am concerned, there 
is no debate; if one identifies as a pro-Gamergater, than that one 
stands side-by-side with the harassment that was done under the 
hashtag. I did not want to allow these people to direct the narrative 
of the Gamergate article.


   So, yes, sometimes one loses one's cool when dealing with dirtbags 
from 8chan/reddit.  However, it is a shame that we who kept the hordes 
at bay, while being harassed by 8chan/reddit and hell, harassed by 
Jimmy Wales himself for a time til his eyes belatedly opened, were not 
cut a little more slack. We were doing something right (with using 
some wrong words/tone at times) and got the same treatment as a 
bunch of throwaway accounts.


   That is the narrative that the mainstream media seems to be running 
with, and while it isn't accurate for them to say feminists and women 
were banned, they are still correctly portraying the WIkipedia's 
Arbcom as doing a pretty bad thing here.


-t





___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-25 Thread Neotarf

st want to make it clear that don't consider myself to be a feminist,
whatever that is. I was not a member of GGTF and have never edited in the
topic of gender. I saw the disruptions on the page, and tried to give some
support and validation to the only admin I saw trying to deal with the
situation. When the ANI discussions seemed like they had gone on for too
long, I tried to use my position as an uninvolved editor to get them to
agree to a voluntary topic ban. I'm pretty much of a newbie with regards
to ANI and have no experience at all with topic bans at all, so maybe I was
too naive in thinking that users could just talk things out and come to
some agreement. If I had succeeded, there would not have been a case.

At the time, I was in the process of deleting my unnecessary sub-pages and
storing them off site, as I had decided to retire. On a whim, I asked for
an RFA review from an admin who was offering to do them, remembering that
Kevin Gorman had a successful RFA after working with KillerChihuahua on
Men's Rights issues. After seeing the comments on the RFA review, I
started to wonder if my Wikipedia experience had really been as negative as
I remembered it. Incidentally, this admin had seen my name on the Gender
Gap case, but did not even consider that anyone might take the accusations
against me seriously.

It's telling that the diffs that were presented about me in the Gender Gap
case had nothing to do with gender or with GGTF. They were copy-pasted
from the statement of an individual whose disruptions the Arbitration
committee had been asked to investigate. The committee even copied his
error in citing BADNAMES policy.

It's clear to me that the Foundation has reached some kind of Seldon
Crisis--if I may borrow a page from Isaac Asimov-- with off-site
meatpuppets, and the arbitration committee is not able to deal with it.
This page is instructive:
http://www.reddit.com/r/GamerGhazi/comments/2lxw4x/effort_gamergates_latest_wikipedia_war_shows_how/

GamerGate's latest Arbitration Request is 15,000 words and climbing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#GamerGate.
That's about 60 typed, double-spaced pages. That's not counting the dozens
(hundreds?) of hyperlinks you have to read to digest it.

It owes its size to 8chan canvasing for meatpuppets
https://archive.today/nmsBK to target specific editors.

Their users dutifully dredged up countless old, investigated and already
settled accusations, and material not appropriate for Arbitration

But perhaps the main takeaway?

This is a typical day in a 3-month ordeal on Wikipedia. It must be
exhausting, which GG must know...

Yes, it is exhausting, especially if you have already stopped editing and
have many pressing things in real life. Even if you come out with your
reputation intact, you will never get those three months of your life
back.

The Arbitration Committee is being expected to do too much here. The arbs
are real individuals, who, in many cases, have had their real life
identities ferreted out. And they are volunteers. They cannot possibly be
expected to investigate these Gamergate individuals who are so well
organized off-site, and who are adept at issuing death threats, and getting
campus events cancelled for security threats. At this point, all the
Arbcom can do, as they did in the Gender Gap case, is to ignore the
mountains of diffs, and make scapegoats of good faith editors. The
Foundation needs to step in here, and protect its editors, not only from
the Gamer Gaters, but from the Arbitration Committee, which is being asked
to do the impossible without any resources.

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 8:12 PM, Tarc . t...@hotmail.com wrote:

Suppose I should say a brief something since some of the posts here
talk about me. I have been caustic and acerbic at the Wikipedia over the
years, though in fits and starts I am trying to take it down a few notches.
So, yea, I'm quite aware that I'm not the best poster-child for any sort of
movement or change or whatnot. I dived into Gamergate after hearing about
some of the really awful things that were being said about Zoe Quinn
elsewhere, thinking (correctly) that her Wiki bio was going to be a
harassment magnet. As far as I am concerned, there is no debate; if one
identifies as a pro-Gamergater, than that one stands side-by-side with
the harassment that was done under the hashtag. I did not want to allow
these people to direct the narrative of the Gamergate article.

So, yes, sometimes one loses one's cool when dealing with dirtbags from
8chan/reddit. However, it is a shame that we who kept the hordes at bay,
while being harassed by 8chan/reddit and hell, harassed by Jimmy Wales
himself for a time til his eyes belatedly opened, were not cut a little more
slack. We were doing something right (with using some wrong words/tone at
times) and got the same treatment as a bunch of throwaway accounts.

That is the narrative that

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-24 Thread LB

I just went and read GorillaWarfare's votes. She is my eyes and ears there.
that is, I trust her judgement. She is an excellent arbitrator, and I wish
the Committee had 4 or 5 more like her.
 On Jan 23, 2015 10:07 PM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 The rediculous thing is that none of the people defending that article
 were 'feminists'. They were just defending the mainstream point of view
 from an endless onslaught of 8channers. The feminist point view isn't even
 represented in the article.

 On Jan 23, 2015, at 7:14 PM, J Hayes slowki...@gmail.com wrote:


 http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/23/wikipedia-bans-editors-from-gender-related-articles-amid-gamergate-controversy


 http://internet.gawker.com/wikipedia-purged-a-group-of-feminist-editors-because-of-1681463331/+cushac


 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
 visit:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
 visit:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-24 Thread LB

I think one thing that could help is to reclaim the GGTF. The thing is to
remain unflappable and ignore The Troll.
 On Jan 24, 2015 9:36 AM, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 7:26 AM, J Hayes slowki...@gmail.com wrote:

 well, they did not revdel it.
 arbcom can drive the  discussion off wiki,
 but cannot ban the Guardian for bad journalism
 certain account behaviors are being favored
 you should expect to see a lot more of those behaviors in the future

 this will necessitate a lot of wiki-splaining

 thank-you arbcom for firing up every up coming feminist editathon
 you may not care how how you are perceived,
 but the negative blowback will tarnish all of wikimedia

 Smallbones has suggested
 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3AWikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias%2FGender_gap_task_forcediff=643969579oldid=643910647
 on the GGTF talk page that a group of Wikipedians petition the Foundation
 to 

 take steps to identify and remove institutionalized sexism on
 Wikipedia.

 One issue that has concerned me is that editors who care about these
 issues don't combine our weight. We have the GGTF, this mailing list, the
 Twitter and Facebook accounts, but we don't act with one voice when it
 matters. I'm not sure of the reasons for that, but I think it damages our
 efforts. What can we do to start pulling together more?

 Sarah

 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
 visit:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-24 Thread Marie Earley

When I see a discussion thread being 'jumped on' and derailed by negative 
comments I sometimes think perhaps the answer is - as a kind of code / 
signifier, and instead of why don't you or if all you've come here to do 
is cause trouble - to say:

Well if this thread / page is going to be knocked off track anyway:

Recipe for chicken noodle soup by Mary Cadogan

Ingredients

900ml chicken or vegetable stock (or Miso soup mix)
1 boneless, skinless chicken breast, about 175g/6oz
1 tsp chopped fresh root ginger
1 garlic clove, finely chopped
50g rice or wheat noodles
2 tbsp sweetcorn, canned or frozen
2-3 mushrooms, thinly sliced
2 spring onions, shredded
2 tsp soy sauce, plus extra for serving
mint or basil leaves and a little shredded chilli (optional), to serve

Method
1. Pour the stock into a pan and add the chicken, ginger and garlic. Bring to 
the boil, then reduce the heat, partly cover and simmer for 20 mins, until the 
chicken is tender. Remove the chicken to a board and shred into bite-size 
pieces using a couple of forks.

2. Return the chicken to the stock with the noodles, corn, mushrooms, half the 
spring onions and the soy sauce. Simmer for 3-4 mins until the noodles are 
tender. Ladle into two bowls and scatter over the remaining spring onions, 
herbs and chilli shreds if using. Serve with extra soy sauce for sprinkling.

 Recipe from the Good Food magazine, February 2006

Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 09:36:46 -0700
From: slimvir...@gmail.com
To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 7:26 AM, J Hayes slowki...@gmail.com wrote:
well, they did not revdel it.
arbcom can drive the  discussion off wiki,
but cannot ban the Guardian for bad journalism
certain account behaviors are being favored
you should expect to see a lot more of those behaviors in the future

this will necessitate a lot of wiki-splaining

thank-you arbcom for firing up every up coming feminist editathon
you may not care how how you are perceived, 
but the negative blowback will tarnish all of wikimedia

Smallbones has suggested on the GGTF talk page that a group of Wikipedians 
petition the Foundation to  take steps to identify and remove 
institutionalized sexism on Wikipedia. 

One issue that has concerned me is that editors who care about these issues 
don't combine our weight. We have the GGTF, this mailing list, the Twitter and 
Facebook accounts, but we don't act with one voice when it matters. I'm not 
sure of the reasons for that, but I think it damages our efforts. What can we 
do to start pulling together more?

Sarah


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap  
  ___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-24 Thread Sarah

On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 7:26 AM, J Hayes slowki...@gmail.com wrote:

 well, they did not revdel it.
 arbcom can drive the  discussion off wiki,
 but cannot ban the Guardian for bad journalism
 certain account behaviors are being favored
 you should expect to see a lot more of those behaviors in the future

 this will necessitate a lot of wiki-splaining

 thank-you arbcom for firing up every up coming feminist editathon
 you may not care how how you are perceived,
 but the negative blowback will tarnish all of wikimedia

 Smallbones has suggested
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3AWikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias%2FGender_gap_task_forcediff=643969579oldid=643910647
on the GGTF talk page that a group of Wikipedians petition the Foundation
to 

take steps to identify and remove institutionalized sexism on
Wikipedia.

One issue that has concerned me is that editors who care about these issues
don't combine our weight. We have the GGTF, this mailing list, the Twitter
and Facebook accounts, but we don't act with one voice when it matters. I'm
not sure of the reasons for that, but I think it damages our efforts. What
can we do to start pulling together more?

Sarah
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-24 Thread J Hayes

well, they did not revdel it.
arbcom can drive the  discussion off wiki,
but cannot ban the Guardian for bad journalism
certain account behaviors are being favored
you should expect to see a lot more of those behaviors in the future

this will necessitate a lot of wiki-splaining

thank-you arbcom for firing up every up coming feminist editathon
you may not care how how you are perceived,
but the negative blowback will tarnish all of wikimedia

On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 12:06 AM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org
wrote:

 The rediculous thing is that none of the people defending that article
 were 'feminists'. They were just defending the mainstream point of view
 from an endless onslaught of 8channers. The feminist point view isn't even
 represented in the article.

 On Jan 23, 2015, at 7:14 PM, J Hayes slowki...@gmail.com wrote:


 http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/23/wikipedia-bans-editors-from-gender-related-articles-amid-gamergate-controversy


 http://internet.gawker.com/wikipedia-purged-a-group-of-feminist-editors-because-of-1681463331/+cushac


 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
 visit:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
 visit:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-23 Thread Carol Moore dc


On 1/23/2015 10:34 PM, Sarah wrote:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 8:14 PM, J Hayes slowki...@gmail.com 
mailto:slowki...@gmail.com wrote:



http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/23/wikipedia-bans-editors-from-gender-related-articles-amid-gamergate-controversy


http://internet.gawker.com/wikipedia-purged-a-group-of-feminist-editors-because-of-1681463331/+cushac

 I started a discussion about the article on the talk page of the 
Gamergate proposed decision, but an Arb hatted it, then a clerk 
removed it. It is here 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate/Proposed_decisionoldid=643858986#Guardian_article_about_the_proposed_decision 
if anyone is interested.


Sarah

Deja vu all over again.  Gang bang at Wikipedia II - with guys getting 
it as well as gals... geez...


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-23 Thread Sarah

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 8:14 PM, J Hayes slowki...@gmail.com wrote:


 http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/23/wikipedia-bans-editors-from-gender-related-articles-amid-gamergate-controversy


 http://internet.gawker.com/wikipedia-purged-a-group-of-feminist-editors-because-of-1681463331/+cushac

 I started a discussion about the article on the talk page of the
Gamergate proposed decision, but an Arb hatted it, then a clerk removed it.
It is here
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate/Proposed_decisionoldid=643858986#Guardian_article_about_the_proposed_decision
if anyone is interested.

Sarah
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

2015-01-23 Thread Ryan Kaldari

The rediculous thing is that none of the people defending that article were 
'feminists'. They were just defending the mainstream point of view from an 
endless onslaught of 8channers. The feminist point view isn't even represented 
in the article.

On Jan 23, 2015, at 7:14 PM, J Hayes slowki...@gmail.com wrote:

 http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/23/wikipedia-bans-editors-from-gender-related-articles-amid-gamergate-controversy
 
 http://internet.gawker.com/wikipedia-purged-a-group-of-feminist-editors-because-of-1681463331/+cushac
 
 
 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please 
 visit:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

32 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information