Re: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Carolmooredc
After adding links to the Slate article to Carol's talk page, the page
has now been protected against all edits apart from sysops. In my
view, the gradual change over the last two years to seeing the edit
rights of banned users changed so
On 12/11/2014 08:55 PM, Carol Moore dc wrote:
Reading the editorial I had to wonder if they actually are saying:
If we think you are using Tor to harass people, we will stop you?
Yea, I read it too and don't know what they are actually saying they
will do
I totally agree with that statement. In the old days bans were done to protect
the project from harm, but more and more they are done as a punishment (which
is supposedly counter to the rules) or to protect a popular point of view. The
end result is bans do more harm to the project than they
Its not surprising that the arbcom would not like comments and be critical of a
venue they do not control and cannot themselves silence critical comments about
their decisions. I finf it unfortunate that an arb doesnt want to join the
mailing list merely because some people here do not share
Hopefully they aren't proposing a standard tougher than than on all the
other mailing lists, none of which I personally belong to.
Oddly enough I've just made that point on-wiki. (Before I'd properly read
your email!)
That said I *do* think this list could do with more active moderation.
Kumioko,
I was happy when you gave up the multiple-a-day screeds you were sending me
about arbitraitors” and how the community’s decision to ban you was somehow
the Arbitration Committee “silencing a critic.” I’m disappointed that you’ve
latched on to a list for productive conversation
GW, accusing me of hijacking this list for a vendetta is a purely untrue
and petty accusation. For the last couple of years my goal on the project
has been to make it more fair for all editors regardless of status (admin
or editor), gender, race, etc. I have been aware, for quite a while, that
Don't know if this has been floated before - apologies if so - but:
Part of the problem we have is the sheer depth of ignorance among otherwise
well-intentioned community members.
This depth of ignorance is naturally shared by the people who play
leadership roles in the community. So we end up
This is also part of the problem - we have helpful contributions from
people like Reguyla / Kumioko who is basically here to complain about how
awful Arbcom are. Some months ago he was engaged in a campaign of personal
abuse against arbitrators which to be frank is exactly the kind of thing
that
GW, accusing me of hijacking this list for a vendetta is a purely untrue and
petty accusation. For the last couple of years my goal on the project has been
to make it more fair for all editors regardless of status (admin or editor),
gender, race, etc.
Well, I’m glad you got some of this very
I'm not sure how I became the bad guy here just because I think there is a
problem with civility and bias that needs to be addressed on Wikipedia.
Personally Chris, I don't think your comments directed at me are
particularly helpful to the goals of this list either. I wasn't the one
that voted 2
Ok, now, before this devolves further, let us all end this stupidity. Lets
get back on topic! GW, your comments today have had nothing to do with this
list other than to attack me. Enough is enough.
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 2:00 PM, gorillawarfarewikipe...@gmail.com wrote:
GW, accusing me of
Why? Because I was banned for trying to make things fair on Wikipedia for
all editors not just admins? Believe it or not, I believe in the goals of
Wikipedia and I have done nothing on this list that would deserve being
kicked off it. In fact, you are the one who is detracting from the point of
Actually, GorillaWarfare was responding to the subject header. She is an
arbitrator. She is also expressing her opinion about why, as an
arbitrator, she has concerns about this list. I think she's bang on.
And I agree with Chris.
Risker/Anne
On 12 December 2014 at 14:08, Reguyla
I think this might be a good idea but it would be pretty hard to implement
and I think, unnecessary. Most of the functionaries got to where they are
because they have a calm demeanor and generally are fair in how they treat
others. Additionally, its not usually the functionaries who are the
Ok, so if this is to be a female only admin only list, then please remove
me from it. I hope that at some point though, if you all are interested in
actually improving systematic bias on Wikipedia and the other WMF projects,
you will be open to all points of view including those of editors who
And for what its worth, not one of GorillaWarfare's responses had anything
to do with this thread, but a way to attack me because of my views that
admins should be accountable for their actions in the same way editors are,
that the Arbcom has become a major part of the civility problem on
Along similar lines, this pilot training has been suggested for admins:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Gender-gap_admin_training
And The Ada Initiative said they were interested in providing training for
such a pilot. WMF grantmakers like myself would be pleased to see something
The thread is about an arbitrator who made a comment about their views on
the list:
Thanks for pointing that out, Risker. I became aware of the article when
browsing through the archives of the gendergap mailing list. Some of what
is said there (on the gendergap mailing list) concerns me enough
While I am waiting for the email confirmation disenrolling me from this
email list, I think this is only going to work if:
1) Someone establishes some metric for determining if the training is
helping
2) If there is some teeth to failure to adhere to the training once its
been taken. If the WMF
Kumioko, you can change your gmail preferences to have this list
automatically dump to spam if you're not getting a fast enough response to
your unsubscribe.
Risker
On 12 December 2014 at 14:43, Reguyla regu...@gmail.com wrote:
While I am waiting for the email confirmation disenrolling me from
No you want me to leave the list, because I was banned for criticizing
admin abuse and the Arbcom of which you are a part. But don't worry, I have
unsubscribed and am simply waiting on the confirmation so soon I will no
longer be on this list and you can continue to ignore the real problems
which
Well, its also possible that whomever is removing me from the list, doesn't
agree that I am a problem. Its funny that the people who want me off the
list are or were members of the Arbcom I have often criticized as being
self serving and problematic.
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Risker
More likely, it is the fact that none of the moderators happen to be online
right now. If you want to leave the list, as is your stated intention, you
can go to your own Mailman preferences and decide which lists to
unsubscribe without waiting for a moderator.
Risker
On 12 December 2014 at
Im sorry if its not happening fast enough for you.
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device
-- Original message--
From: Risker
Date: Fri, Dec 12, 2014 3:03 PM
To: Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation
of women within Wikimedia projects.;
Subject:Re:
You've stated you have unsubscribed; usually, if it's done through your
personal log-in using the mailman system, it should have happened
automatically and you should no longer be getting emails, but that does not
appear to be the case. I am sorry that hasn't happened for you, and to be
honest I
Well, I suppose Kumoiko/Reygula could have reasonably riposted that the proposed email that Arbcom finally did or did not send to his employers was harassment of a sort. However I agree that it seems something of a stretch to accuse you of voting to ban Carol and hand out a mere slap of the
With all due respect to all parties involved: Can you please take this
discussion off-list? It seems to mostly be a matter for a small number of
people.
Best wishes,
Lennart Guldbrandsson
070 - 207 80 05
http://www.elementx.se - arbete
http://www.mrchapel.wordpress.com - personlig blogg
Regardless of whether the Arbcom actually did it, they advocated doing it
so they are still responsible. As for the moderators removing me from the
list, I have received emails from 5 people so far that think I am just
being bullied by 2 arbs and a trustee of WMUK who probably is hoping to
score
Dude, what is wrong with you? Sending over a dozen off-topic message to
a low bandwidth email list? A list about WP's gendergap, a gap which
often appears online when men send a disproportionate number of messages.
___
Gendergap mailing list
My apologies, that wasn't supposed to go to the list.
On 12/12/2014 04:14 PM, Joseph Reagle wrote:
Dude, what is wrong with you? Sending over a dozen off-topic message to
a low bandwidth email list? A list about WP's gendergap, a gap which
often appears online when men send a disproportionate
On Friday, Dec 12, 2014 at 3:38 PM, marinka marinkavandam.com
mari...@marinkavandam.com, wrote:
On topic, are we going to see some more debate about the Slate piece?
Anne/Risker is suggesting there was a basic misunderstanding on the part of the
author: that the whole thing had nothing to do
I've subscribed Reguyla and added text to the footer clarifying that the
link already included in every mail is where you go to unsubscribe.
Apologies for the spotty moderation this past week, I've been traveling.
-Leigh
On Saturday, December 13, 2014, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
You've
Kumioko has been removed from the list - Leigh did so earlier, and I agree
with her decision. Of the posts Carch had a problem with, I don't see most
of them as an issue. Due to health issues I've been almost completely MIA
for the last long period of time and missed the posts as they occurred,
thank you kevin;
i appreciate the spirit that the remarks are taken
i do not appreciate being outed by an arbitrator
linking a private email message to a public talk page.
i would say this conduct amply justifies the remarks i have made about
arbcom in public elsewhere.
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 8:54 PM, Jim Hayes slowki...@gmail.com wrote:
i do not appreciate being outed by an arbitrator
linking a private email message to a public talk page.
What?
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
___
Gendergap mailing list
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 9:53 PM, GorillaWarfare
gorillawarfarewikipe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 8:54 PM, Jim Hayes slowki...@gmail.com wrote:
i do not appreciate being outed by an arbitrator
linking a private email message to a public talk page.
What?
– Molly
I assumed that Reguyla is the same Reguyla as onwiki, the same way that I
assume that Carol is the same Carol and Risker is the same Risker.
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription
38 matches
Mail list logo
