On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Ellie Kesselman myindigol...@gmail.com
wrote:
So then, WHY is Wikipedia more anti-female than some of the seemingly most
female-unfriendly parts of the Internet? I don't know, and it frightens
me. I don't want to be subject to what Lightbreather experienced.
On 16 July 2015 at 22:25, Sarah (SV) slimvir...@gmail.com wrote:
...
None of that answers your question, though, namely why it's worse on
Wikipedia than on other websites.
Sarah
Just to emphasize that based on experience rather than hard
statistics, patterns of harassment and the perception of
I'm not sure what some of the seemingly most female-unfriendly parts of
the Internet might be so Ellie would have to be more specific.
But in my experience writing in a variety of political and economic and
history-related articles on Wikipedia, it's all about male intellectual
territory
On 7/14/2015 8:30 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
Don't you think it's bizarre that ArbCom is punishing Lightbreather for
discussing the identity of the guy who posted porn images, claiming they
depicted Lightbreather? He posted those images off-wiki, and she
discussed it off-wiki.
**I guess that's an
The proposed decision in the Lightbreather case was posted yesterday.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lightbreather/Proposed_decision
It comments extensively on harassment.
The proposed decision has already been controversially discussed on
Twitter:
The good news is this time they actually have a long list of problematic
issues and are not just getting rid of editors for trumped up ones like
that did with Neotarf and I, i.e., just listing of 5 or 6 examples of
being snotty to (powerful and connected) editors who were obnoxiously
harassing
