Hi Trevor,
Thanks for writing directly on the GenderGap list.
When I posted to this list expressing a serious concern that the grant was
limited to delivering tools with the target outcome of blocking more users,
the response from WMF Trustee Christophe Henner on 9 February was "Fae I'm
sorry
Hello all,
What's everyone's thoughts of filtering email to a repository if the email
contains certain words? This could be using tools currently being honed with
the Detox project: https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Detox/Resources
This way, they could be viewed or not viewed by the
Oh, I do certainly think this should be a user's choice and one they could turn
on or off. What do you all think about the whole thought?
I have been also reflecting on what others wrote about getting at the root of
the issue instead of addressing symptoms only. The trouble with making
Anne,
I do think you misinterpreted what I was suggesting and perhaps the project.
The artificial intelligence tool is currently being trained using volunteers to
rank messages, but once launched it would operate and only need humans for
maintenance, I imagine.
--
Jackie Koerner
> On Feb 12,
Having had a thousand nasty and threatening messages from someone who
used about 40 different emails, I still wouldn't like moderation. Is
there a way to retroactively check emails? I guess the headers are it,
and I always sent those (they were all yahoo mail).
On 2/12/2017 2:25 PM, Risker
Good point...
On 2/9/2017 1:01 PM, JJ Marr wrote:
It's not our moral role as Wikipedians and it's not the role of the
Wikimedia foundation to take a deeply investigative role of harassment.
We can block harassers when proof is brought to us, but finding them is
difficult and is a task that
On 02/12/2017 03:38 PM, Risker wrote:
On 12 February 2017 at 17:22, Jonathan Cardy
> wrote:
Clearly not everyone would opt into it if there was an option to
do so. Do you object to the idea of developing an option to
I agree with Risker here.
Pine
On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Risker wrote:
>
>
> On 12 February 2017 at 17:22, Jonathan Cardy
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Risker,
>>
>> Clearly not everyone would opt into it if there was an option to do so.
>> Do
On 12 February 2017 at 17:22, Jonathan Cardy
wrote:
> Thanks Risker,
>
> Clearly not everyone would opt into it if there was an option to do so. Do
> you object to the idea of developing an option to opt in to email filtering?
>
> Regards
>
>
Thanks Risker,
Clearly not everyone would opt into it if there was an option to do so. Do you
object to the idea of developing an option to opt in to email filtering?
Regards
Jonathan/WereSpielChequers
> On 12 Feb 2017, at 19:25, Risker wrote:
>
> I am extremely,
I am extremely, extremely uncomfortable with email moderation. I cannot
emphasize this enough. Frankly, I'd rather the NSA be reading my mail than
my fellow Wikimedians - they have no actual interest in anything that I'm
writing. If moderation became standard, I'd shut off "email this user". It
Thanks Ryan and Chris, I've endorsed the Bethnaught proposal which covers all
of this idea except the email filter bits. I think the privacy issues of a
moderated email stream can be resolved by OTRS style checking of the
moderators. As for the staffing issues I'm optimistic that there are
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 4:44 PM, WereSpielChequers <
werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Christophe, Carol and Fae's notes have set me thinking as to what we could
> do with these funds,
>
> One of the areas that I understand has been a problem is email harassment,
> particularly of women and I
Some of these ideas were advanced in the last Inspire Campaign on
addressing harassment by User:BethNaught:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Allow_users_to_restrict_who_can_send_them_email
If folks want to work on developing this idea for out more concretely, they
can use this
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 3:44 PM, WereSpielChequers <
werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...
>
> The first would be to allow editors to set their email to only receive
> from confirmed or even extended confirmed accounts. This would be invisible
> to new editors, they'd just not see the *email
Christophe, Carol and Fae's notes have set me thinking as to what we could
do with these funds,
One of the areas that I understand has been a problem is email harassment,
particularly of women and I believe particularly from throwaway accounts.
I was wondering what people on this list would
Carol, sorry to see your email took two days to get here. These sorts
of list delays can be a bit confusing when reading through a thread.
(Hint to list admin.)
I would be against setting up Wikimedia secret 'black ops' teams. It's
actually been done before, and it's not good for the people
Thanks for the reply Christophe, I appreciate you posting to this list and
being interested in following community views.
Two points on this:
* Can you tell us how much of the $500k will be spent developing software
tools (which have been stated as having the objective of blocking more
accounts)
The assumption here is that harassing users are the same as blocked users,
to which I say a great big "citation needed". As I recall, one of the big
reasons Kevin gave for moving discussion of gender to this mailing list is
that list moderators are able to keep out harassment, which they were
http://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/craigslist-founder-donates-500k-to-curb-wikipedia-trolls-1.3259781
Wow! When I think of the 2 plus hrs a week x 385 odd weeks of hours I
spent dealing with guys who just didn't like the idea that a "female"
dared to edit - or worse, change their edit - I still
20 matches
Mail list logo