On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 6:33 AM, Fred Bauder <fredb...@fairpoint.net> wrote: >>.. >> Hi Fred, if it were an entirely separate address it would work, an >> email address that is only ever read by women volunteers. >> >> Sarah >> > > That is the way we need to go with perhaps a panel of specialized OTRS > volunteers, for this group, and any other which has a significant problem > in communicating with us in the usual way. > > With respect to women with trust issues, it is inappropriate to expect > resolution of those issues prior to offering accessible and effective > oversight services.
We've identified the low percentage of women participating as a significant problem. It is our problem. It is not their problem. We have language specific queues on OTRS; we have country/chapter specific queues; we have queues with higher privacy bars for suppression and legal problems. I think we should try a gender queue. Whether or not delicacy is required to handle a specific issue, I believe that directing the issue to a group of trusted women will increase the chance that they walk away happy, and possibly even come back. Where a ticket doesn't benefit from female-female communication, it can be pushed into the usual queues to be handled by the regular pool of OTRS volunteers. However there will be occasions when prompt resolution is less important, and waiting until a female oversighter is available won't hurt the outcome. As this is a key strategic focus of the WMF, it would be good if anonymous customer feedback surveys were used to gauge how satisfied women are with the way tickets were handled by OTRS volunteers in this queue. -- John Vandenberg _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
