Thanks Sarah! Nina Sendt fra min iPhone
Den 2. feb. 2012 kl. 22:15 skrev Sarah <[email protected]>: > On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 9:05 PM, emijrp <[email protected]> wrote: >> By the way, you can't invite 1000 women that a day after leave because they >> don't understand how to edit (usability) or other reason. First, you have to >> understand why women leave. When you solves that, every woman that arrives, >> will continue editing "forever". You won't need to invite them. >> > I agree with this point, and I wonder whether we're approaching > outreach from the wrong perspective. We are asking "what is good for > Wikipedia?" when we should be asking "what is good for the women we > want to sign up?" If we create an environment in which they can > thrive, then they'll come and they'll stay, and we won't have to keep > begging them to join us. > > But we have serious problems in the community. I've been on wikibreak > for a few months, during which time I barely looked at Wikipedia (the > English Wikipedia). When I did start to look again, I saw a community > that is really fracturing. Lots of serious incivility, old grudges > being played out in various places, and what one editor called regular > Leninist purges. None of this is new, but it's getting worse. Plus, > too many rules too rigidly enforced, too many confusing templates, and > a push for quality that often boils down to endless nitpicking. And > the most off-putting thing of all -- you spend hours, days or weeks on > a piece of work only to see someone come along and casually destroy > it. > > It is causing established editors to leave or reduce their > involvement, including some of the few women we have. Old editors are > leaving for the same reasons new editors are failing to arrive or > stay. As I've argued many times, we need less outreach and more > "inreach". > > Can we persuade the Foundation to be more hands-on in dealing with the > existing issues, rather than outreach? > > For example, I'm thinking it could offer a $15,000 prize for an essay > that best gives us insight into the problems -- competition widely > advertised, and open to anyone, including non-Wikimedians -- judging > panel to be composed of Foundation employees. Perhaps a major > publisher could be persuaded to publish the winning entry as an extra > incentive. > > I'm also thinking the Foundation could hire a consultant on how to fix > toxic communities. We are basically confronting a kind of workplace > bullying as the essence of the problem, and there are plenty of people > around who specialize in that. We tried to persuade the Foundation > some years ago to hire a consultant on how to handle harassment, but > it didn't work out. I think if we had done that, quite a few of the > issues we see now might have turned out differently. > > I wonder whether the Foundation feels conflicted in this. On the one > hand, they want to promote the idea that "Wikipedia is wonderful. Come > and join us!" On the other hand, acknowledging the community's > problems too openly puts out the opposite of that message. So we end > up not getting the kind of all-out, top-down push for community health > that we need. > > Sarah > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
