@Risker, if your high school student are that benign, perhaps I will move
to Canada.

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 12:54 PM, Risker <[email protected]> wrote:

> Give me a break, Neotarf. I am critiquing the article and the decisions by
> its author and its publisher.  It doesn't surprise me that having someone
> of Keilana's stature drop more f-bombs in a couple of paragraphs than I
> heard on a bus full of high school students this morning will change the
> climate to suggest that it is now perfectly acceptable to curse out people
> everywhere under every circumstance.
>
> For some strange reason, it appears the people on this list are
> celebrating that fact.  And it has nothing to do with gender, really, and
> everything to do with making Wikipedia a pleasant place to work.  Keilana's
> actions have encouraged people to make it less so.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On 22 February 2016 at 12:46, Neotarf <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> @Risker, the double standard is that several individuals dropped f-bombs
>> on the page, but only the woman got tsked.  Talk pages of various users,
>> not to mention the arbitration committee's pages, routinely contain
>> f-bombs, which I have never seen anyone remark on.  JimboTalk has
>> occasionally seen some respectful and considerate pushback, but nothing
>> like the strident comments on the Signpost piece. True, there was a former
>> arbitrator who had an essay about the word deleted, but that was before my
>> time.  In the current climate, an individual can drop the c-bomb on a
>> women's task force page with impunity, while someone who marks such a
>> thread with a NSFW tag can be permabanned for doing so. Wikipedia has
>> become f-Wikipedia; Keilana has claimed her place at the table.
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 11:33 PM, J Hayes <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> risker:
>>> i'm kinda with you about defining deviancy down
>>>
>>> it's just that things are so bad can't go lower
>>> article subjects are already dismayed by the opaque unfriendly culture
>>> they periodically ask for article deletion
>>> librarians are advised about the "cultural buzzsaw"
>>> having a safe environment on line is a lost cause
>>> but we can have a grim determination with much cursing
>>>
>>> cheers
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Risker <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think I've made myself clear, Pete. I don't think that anything I say
>>>> will make a difference, any more than anything I have ever said has changed
>>>> the sub-optimal behaviour of any editor who thinks it's acceptable
>>>> professional behaviour to cuss all over the place.  I'm just really
>>>> disappointed that people who used to be in the "let's make this a more
>>>> pleasant and positive place to do our work" have gone over to the other
>>>> side.
>>>>
>>>> Risker
>>>>
>>>> On 21 February 2016 at 19:38, Pete Forsyth <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Risker, I want to be clear:
>>>>>
>>>>> It's not that I don't see a problem. I'm actually pretty sympathetic
>>>>> to your view; but I think your point has been made very strongly already,
>>>>> and the important audience is the Signpost editorial staff. I am confident
>>>>> they have heard the message, and I don't see how further discussion moves
>>>>> us in a better direction. The past can't be changed. I suppose the 
>>>>> Signpost
>>>>> could retract the op-ed, but I rather doubt you're seeking something so
>>>>> extreme...or am I wrong?
>>>>>
>>>>> -Pete
>>>>> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 2:39 PM, Risker <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I feel very sad that you fellows don't see the problem in using this
>>>>>> kind of language to describe women. "Badass" isn't a compliment. After 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> first two descriptions, I was fully expecting to see "brilliant
>>>>>> motherf***er" to describe the third one.  I'm surprised it wasn't used, 
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> fact.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The subjects of our articles deserve to be treated much better than
>>>>>> this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Further, I'm incredibly disappointed that this got published in The
>>>>>> Signpost.  On Emily's own page...well, okay.  But instead of drawing
>>>>>> attention to the women who are the subjects of the articles, almost all 
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> the discussion is about the language used to describe them....and 
>>>>>> pointing
>>>>>> out that several of them already had articles about them that were
>>>>>> improved, rather than that they'd not been written about at all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All in all, it impressed me as an island of lovely flowers in a
>>>>>> garden with a winter's worth of St. Bernard droppings.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Risker
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 21 February 2016 at 17:13, Pete Forsyth <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1 Ryan.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This was one article, and no Wikipedians, readers, or article
>>>>>>> subjects were injured as a result of its publication. I don't really 
>>>>>>> have a
>>>>>>> strong opinion one way or the other about whether using language in this
>>>>>>> way is OK. But the main lesson to me is how much the English Wikipedia
>>>>>>> community has come to value the Signpost as an institution. It's hard to
>>>>>>> imagine such any Signpost column inspiring so much passion, say, five 
>>>>>>> years
>>>>>>> ago. Above all, I think this constitutes a strong endorsement of the
>>>>>>> general value of the Signpost.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Pete
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Ryan Kaldari <
>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The depressing thing to me is that the English Wikipedia community
>>>>>>>> takes all of 10 minutes to work itself into a frenzy about the use of
>>>>>>>> profanity in a positive, non-personal way, but if an editor on 
>>>>>>>> Wikipedia
>>>>>>>> calls a female editor a cunt, no one dares to bat an eye.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Risker <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is it a double standard?  If that page hadn't been written by
>>>>>>>>> Keilana, would it have been published as is?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Perhaps you're right, it *is* a double standard.  Just not quite
>>>>>>>>> the one some think it would be.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Risker/Anne
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 21 February 2016 at 08:31, Neotarf <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Op-ed about systemic bias and articles created.  Interesting
>>>>>>>>>> double standard about profanity in the comment section.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2016-02-17/Op-ed
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
>>>>>>>>>> please visit:
>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
>>>>>>>>> please visit:
>>>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
>>>>>>>> please visit:
>>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
>>>>>>> please visit:
>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
>>>>>> please visit:
>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
>>>>> please visit:
>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
>>>> please visit:
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
>>> visit:
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
>> visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gendergap mailing list
> [email protected]
> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
> visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
[email protected]
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Reply via email to