I would assume that WMF has an ombudsman who would do just that, but I see that there is only this: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_commission
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 7:50 AM, Sarah <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 9:55 PM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >A major problem with our dispute-resolution processes is that the >> person being harassed has >to endure more harassment to draw attention to >> the problem. >> >> This is, of course, hardly unique to Wikipedia or even online >> communities in general, I think. >> > > Hi Daniel, the very public nature of it on Wikipedia makes it unusual and > very stressful. > > >> >> >> >I have long thought the Foundation ought to employ a team of specialists >> who can take up >those cases when they see them, so that the pursuit of >> sanctions is not laid at the victim's >door. This is perhaps similar to >> Sumana's suggestion that communities need dedicated >helpers who will do >> the emotional labour in conflict situations. >> >> Would there be a good existing example of such a program we could take a >> look at? >> >> Daniel Case >> > > Sumana talked > <https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Hospitality,_Jerks,_and_What_I_Learned> > about the situation at Hacker School: " > If you don’t understand why something you did broke the rules, you don't > ask the person who corrected you. You ask a facilitator. You ask someone > who’s paid to do that emotional labor, and you don't bring everyone else's > work to a screeching halt. This might sound a little bit foreign to some of > us right now. Being able to ask someone to stop doing the thing that’s > harming everyone else’s work and knowing that it will actually stop and > that there’s someone else who’s paid to do that emotional labor who will > take care of any conversation that needs to happen. > " > > The idea of having people paid to do this is very attractive for > Wikipedia. I think they would have to be professionals with appropriate > training, otherwise there's a big risk of making things worse. The > Foundation probably has enough of an income to consider this, given the > potential impact on the atmosphere and editor retention. > > 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
