Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

[Neotarf]

There is some association with a private GLAM mailing list.  I could not
find out more, and I cannot give more details without risk of exposing
someone's identity. No idea if it is a NDA, NCA or NPA or something else,
even a misunderstanding, you know how people can be, but why would
something be secret if it does not exist? If you know people in these
institutions maybe you can count for yourself how many of them are
anonymous and how many list their employers on their talk page, and if
there is some uniformity, how that might have come to be.  I am unable to
go further with this issue, but as they say, first do no harm, my loyalty
will be to protecting the careers and reputations of real people, I do
believe this should be the best interest of the WMF as well. It is sad that
when there can be no public discussions of these issues without reprisals,
only the private channels remain.

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Robert Fernandez 
wrote:

> No, that's exactly the opposite of what was said.  I did not say I signed
> a non-disparagement agreement.  I said I signed the standard WMF
> confidentiality agreement.
>
> You can read it here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> i/Confidentiality_agreement_for_nonpublic_information/  Everyone signs it
> for even mundane things.  I first signed it when I processed free database
> accounts for The Wikipedia Library and had access to names and email
> addresses of editors.
>
> You can see there's nothing in it about non-disparagement.  I feel quite
> free to disparage any person or institution that I choose.
>
> Given that you are unable to distinguish between a routine confidentiality
> agreement and a non-disparagement agreement, or between normal criticism
> and the suppression of discussion, I'm pretty confident that these alleged
> NPAs have never existed.
>
> The idea that Risker "wants to suppress all discussion" of these alleged
> NPAs is nonsense.  She merely pointed out, quite correctly, that spreading
> baseless allegations is quite damaging to the very causes you profess to
> care about.Please consider that before you continue to double down on a
> baseless allegation.  There are plenty of legitimate criticisms to level at
> the Foundation and this community for ineptness and inaction in these areas
> without making things up.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Neotarf  wrote:
>
>> So we have two former arbitrators on this list, one of whom has offered
>> to assist in evaluating this thing privately, and who has himself signed
>> such a non-disparagement agreement, and another who wants to suppress all
>> discussion of it.  We don't know if she has signed such an agreement.
>>
>> Publications like the New York Times and Washington Post do print and
>> evaluate information without naming sources, and it is true they are
>> sometimes called "fake news" on Twitter, but does not make the information
>> "factless", or prevent Wikipedia from consider them to be RS.
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Risker  wrote:
>>
>>> So, in other words, you have no evidence at all, except for some gossip,
>>> that *anyone* is being required to sign NDAs in order to edit Wikipedia.
>>> You have some information that suggests other organizations, completely
>>> separate from Wikipedia,
>>>
>>> It's bad enough that women do, indeed, face greater sexual harassment
>>> both societally and on Wikimedia projects, something that is quantified in
>>> various ways even if there is some question about the accuracy of that
>>> quantification.  Sesnsationalistic statements such as yours, without any
>>> evidence at all, have a very significant negative impact on the ability to
>>> fight such harassment, especially when they seem so absurd.  Simply put,
>>> it's factless allegation, or what certain sectors of the American public
>>> have come to term "fake news".  Please retract your statement.
>>>
>>> Risker/Anne
>>>
>>> On 7 August 2017 at 08:21, Neotarf  wrote:
>>>
 I have no way of investigating something I was not supposed to find out
 about in the first place. Given Wikipedia's culture of retaliation against
 anyone who speaks out, I am unlikely to find out more, but it did seem
 credible. These agreements are becoming more common, for instance here a
 female employee wanted to get out of her non-disparagement agreement but
 Angel List said no. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0
 7/21/technology/silicon-valley-sexual-harassment-non-dispara
 gement-agreements.html Also the internal Google gender manifesto that
 was just leaked "Until about a week ago, you would have heard very little
 from me publicly about this, because (as a fairly senior Googler) my job
 would have been to deal with it internally, and confidentiality rules would
 have prevented me from saying much in public.But as it happens, (although
 this wasn’t the way I was 

Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

[Robert Fernandez]

No, that's exactly the opposite of what was said.  I did not say I signed a
non-disparagement agreement.  I said I signed the standard WMF
confidentiality agreement.

You can read it here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Confidentiality_
agreement_for_nonpublic_information/  Everyone signs it for even mundane
things.  I first signed it when I processed free database accounts for The
Wikipedia Library and had access to names and email addresses of editors.

You can see there's nothing in it about non-disparagement.  I feel quite
free to disparage any person or institution that I choose.

Given that you are unable to distinguish between a routine confidentiality
agreement and a non-disparagement agreement, or between normal criticism
and the suppression of discussion, I'm pretty confident that these alleged
NPAs have never existed.

The idea that Risker "wants to suppress all discussion" of these alleged
NPAs is nonsense.  She merely pointed out, quite correctly, that spreading
baseless allegations is quite damaging to the very causes you profess to
care about.Please consider that before you continue to double down on a
baseless allegation.  There are plenty of legitimate criticisms to level at
the Foundation and this community for ineptness and inaction in these areas
without making things up.






On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Neotarf  wrote:

> So we have two former arbitrators on this list, one of whom has offered to
> assist in evaluating this thing privately, and who has himself signed such
> a non-disparagement agreement, and another who wants to suppress all
> discussion of it.  We don't know if she has signed such an agreement.
>
> Publications like the New York Times and Washington Post do print and
> evaluate information without naming sources, and it is true they are
> sometimes called "fake news" on Twitter, but does not make the information
> "factless", or prevent Wikipedia from consider them to be RS.
>
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Risker  wrote:
>
>> So, in other words, you have no evidence at all, except for some gossip,
>> that *anyone* is being required to sign NDAs in order to edit Wikipedia.
>> You have some information that suggests other organizations, completely
>> separate from Wikipedia,
>>
>> It's bad enough that women do, indeed, face greater sexual harassment
>> both societally and on Wikimedia projects, something that is quantified in
>> various ways even if there is some question about the accuracy of that
>> quantification.  Sesnsationalistic statements such as yours, without any
>> evidence at all, have a very significant negative impact on the ability to
>> fight such harassment, especially when they seem so absurd.  Simply put,
>> it's factless allegation, or what certain sectors of the American public
>> have come to term "fake news".  Please retract your statement.
>>
>> Risker/Anne
>>
>> On 7 August 2017 at 08:21, Neotarf  wrote:
>>
>>> I have no way of investigating something I was not supposed to find out
>>> about in the first place. Given Wikipedia's culture of retaliation against
>>> anyone who speaks out, I am unlikely to find out more, but it did seem
>>> credible. These agreements are becoming more common, for instance here a
>>> female employee wanted to get out of her non-disparagement agreement but
>>> Angel List said no. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0
>>> 7/21/technology/silicon-valley-sexual-harassment-non-dispara
>>> gement-agreements.html Also the internal Google gender manifesto that
>>> was just leaked "Until about a week ago, you would have heard very little
>>> from me publicly about this, because (as a fairly senior Googler) my job
>>> would have been to deal with it internally, and confidentiality rules would
>>> have prevented me from saying much in public.But as it happens, (although
>>> this wasn’t the way I was planning on announcing it) I actually recently
>>> left Google..." https://medium.com/@yonatanzun
>>> ger/so-about-this-googlers-manifesto-1e3773ed1788
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:16 AM, Risker  wrote:
>>>


 On 6 August 2017 at 23:08, Neotarf  wrote:

> ..
>
> Women who do not want to interact on these terms, with individuals who
> are quite probably minors, are being silenced.  I have heard that
> professional women are being recruited for Wikipedia, women whose 
> employers
> would ordinarily be expected to protect them from a 'hostile work place',
> but they are being required to post their real identities on their talk
> pages, along with the names of their employers. and a COI form statement.
> They are also required to sign a non-disclosure agreement that prevents
> them from revealing any harassment they experience in Wikipedia, or from
> even revealing they have been required to sign an NDA.  These women will
> join Wikipedia, and listen 

Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

[Risker]

You're mistaken, Neotarf.  There is no non-disparagement agreement, and
arbitrators have never been required to sign one or even offered the
opportunity to sign one, nor have functionaries or anyone else.  There is a*
confidentiality* agreement that refers to private and confidential
information, which volunteers who have access to such information are
required to sign.[1]  These are two very different things.  I am not
suggesting that discussion be suppressed - I am insisting that you "show us
the money" - give us some evidence that what you are saying is true. If you
can't do thatthen you're just gossiping, and that's not what this list
is about.

You are trying to persuade this list that articles in respected journals
about policies of companies that have nothing to do with Wikipedia or
Wikimedia are somehow or other related to some rumour you have heard that
women are being forced to sign non-whatever agreements in order to edit
Wikipedia - a rumour which you have bluntly refused to back up.

At this stage, your allegation that anyone is required to post their real
name, identify their COI, and sign non-disparagement agreements in order to
edit wikipedia is...well, factless, until you can show us some facts.

Risker/Anne

[1] List of people who have current and valid confidentiality agreements:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Access_to_nonpublic_information_policy/Noticeboard

On 7 August 2017 at 14:11, Neotarf  wrote:

> So we have two former arbitrators on this list, one of whom has offered to
> assist in evaluating this thing privately, and who has himself signed such
> a non-disparagement agreement, and another who wants to suppress all
> discussion of it.  We don't know if she has signed such an agreement.
>
> Publications like the New York Times and Washington Post do print and
> evaluate information without naming sources, and it is true they are
> sometimes called "fake news" on Twitter, but does not make the information
> "factless", or prevent Wikipedia from consider them to be RS.
>
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Risker  wrote:
>
>> So, in other words, you have no evidence at all, except for some gossip,
>> that *anyone* is being required to sign NDAs in order to edit Wikipedia.
>> You have some information that suggests other organizations, completely
>> separate from Wikipedia,
>>
>> It's bad enough that women do, indeed, face greater sexual harassment
>> both societally and on Wikimedia projects, something that is quantified in
>> various ways even if there is some question about the accuracy of that
>> quantification.  Sesnsationalistic statements such as yours, without any
>> evidence at all, have a very significant negative impact on the ability to
>> fight such harassment, especially when they seem so absurd.  Simply put,
>> it's factless allegation, or what certain sectors of the American public
>> have come to term "fake news".  Please retract your statement.
>>
>> Risker/Anne
>>
>> On 7 August 2017 at 08:21, Neotarf  wrote:
>>
>>> I have no way of investigating something I was not supposed to find out
>>> about in the first place. Given Wikipedia's culture of retaliation against
>>> anyone who speaks out, I am unlikely to find out more, but it did seem
>>> credible. These agreements are becoming more common, for instance here a
>>> female employee wanted to get out of her non-disparagement agreement but
>>> Angel List said no. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0
>>> 7/21/technology/silicon-valley-sexual-harassment-non-dispara
>>> gement-agreements.html Also the internal Google gender manifesto that
>>> was just leaked "Until about a week ago, you would have heard very little
>>> from me publicly about this, because (as a fairly senior Googler) my job
>>> would have been to deal with it internally, and confidentiality rules would
>>> have prevented me from saying much in public.But as it happens, (although
>>> this wasn’t the way I was planning on announcing it) I actually recently
>>> left Google..." https://medium.com/@yonatanzun
>>> ger/so-about-this-googlers-manifesto-1e3773ed1788
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:16 AM, Risker  wrote:
>>>


 On 6 August 2017 at 23:08, Neotarf  wrote:

> ..
>
> Women who do not want to interact on these terms, with individuals who
> are quite probably minors, are being silenced.  I have heard that
> professional women are being recruited for Wikipedia, women whose 
> employers
> would ordinarily be expected to protect them from a 'hostile work place',
> but they are being required to post their real identities on their talk
> pages, along with the names of their employers. and a COI form statement.
> They are also required to sign a non-disclosure agreement that prevents
> them from revealing any harassment they experience in Wikipedia, or from
> even revealing they have 

Re: [Gendergap] How to increase the diversity of Wikimedia technical contributors and staff?

[Peter Southwood]

I agree very much with this.  

Cheers,

P

 

From: Gendergap [mailto:gendergap-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Fluffernutter wiki
Sent: Monday, 07 August 2017 3:31 PM
To: Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation 
of women within Wikimedia projects.
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] How to increase the diversity of Wikimedia technical 
contributors and staff?

 

This is a topic of much interest to me. Thank you for bringing it up!

 

First, though, I want to tease apart two of the points you make here, Pine: 
increasing technical contributions/participation by non-majority demographics, 
and increasing the number of people from non-majority demographics who get 
technical degrees or take technical jobs. The two are related, but not the 
same, and I would encourage us to think about both when we think about how to 
increase our movement's diversity. For instance, I do not have a STEM degree, 
and I will almost certainly never be the person who applies for or wins 
technical/programming jobs. But I am a person who is interested in making some 
technical contributions where I think they could be useful. What you could do 
to get me to step into that space is not necessarily what you should do to get 
another young woman to take a Computer Science degree.

 

The rest of this email will focus on my thoughts as someone in the first group 
- someone who is not a vocational technical contributor, but has very 
tentatively been easing a toe into the waters of technical contributions in the 
past year in my spare time. 

 

On an individual level, what I have found extremely helpful on the part of 
other people/communities has been to for them to let me know that there is a 
particular person or venue I can approach for help with my probably-stupid 
questions when I get stuck, who not only won't judge me harshly, but will enjoy 
the experience of helping me learn. And it's not enough for that person/venue 
to exist in a conceptual way - a lot of the time I need to be explicitly 
invited to approach them (and maybe even later  reassured that "no, really, 
approach them! they like helping!"), because otherwise I will assume what is 
true of many other technical spaces/people: they do not welcome those who are 
not already up to speed.[1]

 

In the case of the contributions I've been working on thus far, I was lucky 
enough to already be acquainted with a community-oriented technical contributor 
who enjoys helping people who want to solve technical problems but who need a 
little support in figuring out the implementation. I can't overstate how much 
further I have gotten in building my scripts, etc simply because I know I can 
reach out to this particular person when I get stuck, and they will not only 
help me figure out how to get un-stuck, but they will give me a digestible 
explanation for how the un-sticking works, so that I am one more step forward 
for the next time I try. Knowing that the support is there gives me the guts to 
try new things without worrying too much about it being "wasted time" when I 
hit the limits of my own knowledge. In my case, my helper happens to be male 
and someone I already knew, but I can easily imagine that for many non-majority 
people coming into technical contributions who don't already have connections 
to anyone, it would be even better if they knew there was someone of a 
particular gender, etc that they felt at ease with who was basically wearing a 
sign that said "Ask me your stupid questions! I want to help!"

 

Similarly, I haven't yet attended any technical events like hackathons, but I'm 
very curious about them. I like the idea of going in with an idea and coming 
out with a thing I built. However, I have the (possibly incorrect?) impression 
right now that hackathons are for people who are already capable of building 
their thing, not for people who are working on learning to build their thing, 
and so I feel that if I were to attend one, I would either be a bother to 
everyone else who feels forced to help me when I ask question after question, 
or I would simply spend the weekend watching everyone else capably build things 
while I sat on the sidelines. What would get me over that hill of anxiety and 
into a hackathon? Basically being told ahead of time and explicitly that help 
would not only be available, but also easily found and enthusiastically given. 
Perhaps something like a program that says "Room C will be staffed all weekend 
by experienced technical contributors who are available to help beginners or 
those who need another opinion", or a system of "people wearing the orange 
lanyards are happy to answer beginner questions; approach them whenever you 
need", or a separate track that was a "so you want to build something? Let's 
get you started!" introductory workshop. Maybe those things already exist at 
hackathons - but if they do, they're not being advertised loudly enough, 
because I don't know about them 

Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

[Neotarf]

So we have two former arbitrators on this list, one of whom has offered to
assist in evaluating this thing privately, and who has himself signed such
a non-disparagement agreement, and another who wants to suppress all
discussion of it.  We don't know if she has signed such an agreement.

Publications like the New York Times and Washington Post do print and
evaluate information without naming sources, and it is true they are
sometimes called "fake news" on Twitter, but does not make the information
"factless", or prevent Wikipedia from consider them to be RS.

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Risker  wrote:

> So, in other words, you have no evidence at all, except for some gossip,
> that *anyone* is being required to sign NDAs in order to edit Wikipedia.
> You have some information that suggests other organizations, completely
> separate from Wikipedia,
>
> It's bad enough that women do, indeed, face greater sexual harassment both
> societally and on Wikimedia projects, something that is quantified in
> various ways even if there is some question about the accuracy of that
> quantification.  Sesnsationalistic statements such as yours, without any
> evidence at all, have a very significant negative impact on the ability to
> fight such harassment, especially when they seem so absurd.  Simply put,
> it's factless allegation, or what certain sectors of the American public
> have come to term "fake news".  Please retract your statement.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On 7 August 2017 at 08:21, Neotarf  wrote:
>
>> I have no way of investigating something I was not supposed to find out
>> about in the first place. Given Wikipedia's culture of retaliation against
>> anyone who speaks out, I am unlikely to find out more, but it did seem
>> credible. These agreements are becoming more common, for instance here a
>> female employee wanted to get out of her non-disparagement agreement but
>> Angel List said no. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0
>> 7/21/technology/silicon-valley-sexual-harassment-non-dispara
>> gement-agreements.html Also the internal Google gender manifesto that
>> was just leaked "Until about a week ago, you would have heard very little
>> from me publicly about this, because (as a fairly senior Googler) my job
>> would have been to deal with it internally, and confidentiality rules would
>> have prevented me from saying much in public.But as it happens, (although
>> this wasn’t the way I was planning on announcing it) I actually recently
>> left Google..." https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-
>> manifesto-1e3773ed1788
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:16 AM, Risker  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6 August 2017 at 23:08, Neotarf  wrote:
>>>
 ..

 Women who do not want to interact on these terms, with individuals who
 are quite probably minors, are being silenced.  I have heard that
 professional women are being recruited for Wikipedia, women whose employers
 would ordinarily be expected to protect them from a 'hostile work place',
 but they are being required to post their real identities on their talk
 pages, along with the names of their employers. and a COI form statement.
 They are also required to sign a non-disclosure agreement that prevents
 them from revealing any harassment they experience in Wikipedia, or from
 even revealing they have been required to sign an NDA.  These women will
 join Wikipedia, and listen to the pitch and eat the bagels, and Wikipedia
 gets to count them as female editors, but very few of them go on to make
 that second edit, because it's their professional reputation on the line.

 If Wikipedia wants women editors they are going to have to come to
 terms with this.



>>> This is a very inflammatory thing to say, Neotarf, and I need to insist
>>> that you show some proof of this.  Links to discussions or requirements,
>>> please. This is far too sensationalistic to allow it to sit here without
>>> serious evidence.
>>>
>>> Risker/Anne
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
>>> visit:
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
>> visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
>
>
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
> visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
___
Gendergap mailing list

Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

[Risker]

So, in other words, you have no evidence at all, except for some gossip,
that *anyone* is being required to sign NDAs in order to edit Wikipedia.
You have some information that suggests other organizations, completely
separate from Wikipedia,

It's bad enough that women do, indeed, face greater sexual harassment both
societally and on Wikimedia projects, something that is quantified in
various ways even if there is some question about the accuracy of that
quantification.  Sesnsationalistic statements such as yours, without any
evidence at all, have a very significant negative impact on the ability to
fight such harassment, especially when they seem so absurd.  Simply put,
it's factless allegation, or what certain sectors of the American public
have come to term "fake news".  Please retract your statement.

Risker/Anne

On 7 August 2017 at 08:21, Neotarf  wrote:

> I have no way of investigating something I was not supposed to find out
> about in the first place. Given Wikipedia's culture of retaliation against
> anyone who speaks out, I am unlikely to find out more, but it did seem
> credible. These agreements are becoming more common, for instance here a
> female employee wanted to get out of her non-disparagement agreement but
> Angel List said no. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/21/technology/silicon-
> valley-sexual-harassment-non-disparagement-agreements.html Also the
> internal Google gender manifesto that was just leaked "Until about a week
> ago, you would have heard very little from me publicly about this, because
> (as a fairly senior Googler) my job would have been to deal with it
> internally, and confidentiality rules would have prevented me from saying
> much in public.But as it happens, (although this wasn’t the way I was
> planning on announcing it) I actually recently left Google..."
> https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-manifesto-
> 1e3773ed1788
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:16 AM, Risker  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 6 August 2017 at 23:08, Neotarf  wrote:
>>
>>> ..
>>>
>>> Women who do not want to interact on these terms, with individuals who
>>> are quite probably minors, are being silenced.  I have heard that
>>> professional women are being recruited for Wikipedia, women whose employers
>>> would ordinarily be expected to protect them from a 'hostile work place',
>>> but they are being required to post their real identities on their talk
>>> pages, along with the names of their employers. and a COI form statement.
>>> They are also required to sign a non-disclosure agreement that prevents
>>> them from revealing any harassment they experience in Wikipedia, or from
>>> even revealing they have been required to sign an NDA.  These women will
>>> join Wikipedia, and listen to the pitch and eat the bagels, and Wikipedia
>>> gets to count them as female editors, but very few of them go on to make
>>> that second edit, because it's their professional reputation on the line.
>>>
>>> If Wikipedia wants women editors they are going to have to come to terms
>>> with this.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> This is a very inflammatory thing to say, Neotarf, and I need to insist
>> that you show some proof of this.  Links to discussions or requirements,
>> please. This is far too sensationalistic to allow it to sit here without
>> serious evidence.
>>
>> Risker/Anne
>>
>> ___
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
>> visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
>
>
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
> visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] How to increase the diversity of Wikimedia technical contributors and staff?

[JJ Marr]

I think Wikipedia editors should be a higher priority than technical
contributors. If one looks at most of the STEM community, it appears to be
a systematic problem in underrepresentation. On the other hand, in the
editing environment, there is an underrepresentation of women identifying
editors but at the same time there is a much more gender equal proportion
of women writers in the wider world.

The problem of women editors is a Wikipedia-centric problem, while women
technical staff is one within the wider world and will take a lot more than
just a Wikimedia drive.

On 07 Aug 2017 9:31 AM, "Fluffernutter wiki" 
wrote:

> This is a topic of much interest to me. Thank you for bringing it up!
>
> First, though, I want to tease apart two of the points you make here,
> Pine: increasing technical contributions/participation by non-majority
> demographics, and increasing the number of people from non-majority
> demographics who get technical degrees or take technical jobs. The two are
> related, but not the same, and I would encourage us to think about both
> when we think about how to increase our movement's diversity. For instance,
> I do not have a STEM degree, and I will almost certainly never be the
> person who applies for or wins technical/programming jobs. But I *am *a
> person who is interested in making some technical contributions where I
> think they could be useful. What you could do to get me to step into that
> space is not necessarily what you should do to get another young woman to
> take a Computer Science degree.
>
> The rest of this email will focus on my thoughts as someone in the first
> group - someone who is not a vocational technical contributor, but has very
> tentatively been easing a toe into the waters of technical contributions in
> the past year in my spare time.
>
> On an individual level, what I have found extremely helpful on the part of
> other people/communities has been to for them to let me *know that there
> is a particular person or venue I can approach for help with my
> probably-stupid questions when I get stuck, who not only won't judge me
> harshly, but will enjoy the experience of helping me learn*. And it's not
> enough for that person/venue to exist in a conceptual way - a lot of the
> time I need to be explicitly invited to approach them (and maybe even later
>  reassured that "no, really, approach them! they like helping!"), because
> otherwise I will assume what is true of many other technical spaces/people:
> they do not welcome those who are not already up to speed.[1]
>
> In the case of the contributions I've been working on thus far, I was
> lucky enough to already be acquainted with a community-oriented technical
> contributor who enjoys helping people who want to solve technical problems
> but who need a little support in figuring out the implementation. *I
> can't overstate how much further I have gotten in building my scripts, etc
> simply because I know I can reach out to this particular person when I get
> stuck, and they will not only help me figure out how to get un-stuck, but
> they will give me a digestible explanation for how the un-sticking works*,
> so that I am one more step forward for the next time I try. Knowing that
> the support is there gives me the guts to try new things without worrying
> too much about it being "wasted time" when I hit the limits of my own
> knowledge. In my case, my helper happens to be male and someone I already
> knew, but I can easily imagine that for many non-majority people coming
> into technical contributions who don't already have connections to anyone,
> it would be even better if they knew there was someone of a particular
> gender, etc that they felt at ease with who was basically wearing a sign
> that said "Ask me your stupid questions! I want to help!"
>
> Similarly, I haven't yet attended any technical events like hackathons,
> but I'm very curious about them. I like the idea of going in with an idea
> and coming out with a thing I built. However, I have the (possibly
> incorrect?) impression right now that hackathons are for people who are
> already capable of building their thing, not for people who are working on
> learning to build their thing, and so I feel that if I were to attend one,
> I would either be a bother to everyone else who feels forced to help me
> when I ask question after question, or I would simply spend the weekend
> watching everyone else capably build things while I sat on the sidelines. 
> *What
> would get me over that hill of anxiety and into a hackathon? Basically
> being told ahead of time and explicitly that help would not only be
> available, but also easily found and enthusiastically given*. Perhaps
> something like a program that says "Room C will be staffed all weekend by
> experienced technical contributors who are available to help beginners or
> those who need another opinion", or a system of "people wearing the orange
> lanyards are 

Re: [Gendergap] How to increase the diversity of Wikimedia technical contributors and staff?

[Fluffernutter wiki]

This is a topic of much interest to me. Thank you for bringing it up!

First, though, I want to tease apart two of the points you make here, Pine:
increasing technical contributions/participation by non-majority
demographics, and increasing the number of people from non-majority
demographics who get technical degrees or take technical jobs. The two are
related, but not the same, and I would encourage us to think about both
when we think about how to increase our movement's diversity. For instance,
I do not have a STEM degree, and I will almost certainly never be the
person who applies for or wins technical/programming jobs. But I *am *a
person who is interested in making some technical contributions where I
think they could be useful. What you could do to get me to step into that
space is not necessarily what you should do to get another young woman to
take a Computer Science degree.

The rest of this email will focus on my thoughts as someone in the first
group - someone who is not a vocational technical contributor, but has very
tentatively been easing a toe into the waters of technical contributions in
the past year in my spare time.

On an individual level, what I have found extremely helpful on the part of
other people/communities has been to for them to let me *know that there is
a particular person or venue I can approach for help with my
probably-stupid questions when I get stuck, who not only won't judge me
harshly, but will enjoy the experience of helping me learn*. And it's not
enough for that person/venue to exist in a conceptual way - a lot of the
time I need to be explicitly invited to approach them (and maybe even later
 reassured that "no, really, approach them! they like helping!"), because
otherwise I will assume what is true of many other technical spaces/people:
they do not welcome those who are not already up to speed.[1]

In the case of the contributions I've been working on thus far, I was lucky
enough to already be acquainted with a community-oriented technical
contributor who enjoys helping people who want to solve technical problems
but who need a little support in figuring out the implementation. *I can't
overstate how much further I have gotten in building my scripts, etc simply
because I know I can reach out to this particular person when I get stuck,
and they will not only help me figure out how to get un-stuck, but they
will give me a digestible explanation for how the un-sticking works*, so
that I am one more step forward for the next time I try. Knowing that the
support is there gives me the guts to try new things without worrying too
much about it being "wasted time" when I hit the limits of my own
knowledge. In my case, my helper happens to be male and someone I already
knew, but I can easily imagine that for many non-majority people coming
into technical contributions who don't already have connections to anyone,
it would be even better if they knew there was someone of a particular
gender, etc that they felt at ease with who was basically wearing a sign
that said "Ask me your stupid questions! I want to help!"

Similarly, I haven't yet attended any technical events like hackathons, but
I'm very curious about them. I like the idea of going in with an idea and
coming out with a thing I built. However, I have the (possibly incorrect?)
impression right now that hackathons are for people who are already capable
of building their thing, not for people who are working on learning to
build their thing, and so I feel that if I were to attend one, I would
either be a bother to everyone else who feels forced to help me when I ask
question after question, or I would simply spend the weekend watching
everyone else capably build things while I sat on the sidelines. *What
would get me over that hill of anxiety and into a hackathon? Basically
being told ahead of time and explicitly that help would not only be
available, but also easily found and enthusiastically given*. Perhaps
something like a program that says "Room C will be staffed all weekend by
experienced technical contributors who are available to help beginners or
those who need another opinion", or a system of "people wearing the orange
lanyards are happy to answer beginner questions; approach them whenever you
need", or a separate track that was a "so you want to build something?
Let's get you started!" introductory workshop. Maybe those things already
exist at hackathons - but if they do, they're not being advertised loudly
enough, because I don't know about them (and I'm pretty well-versed in
movement stuff, so if I don't know about them, it's even less likely that
a, say, random WOC who's interested in joining the movement would be).

Anyway, I'm really glad this issue has been brought up, and I'm looking
forward to reading other people's takes on it!


*[1]* I want to clarify here that when I say people/spaces "do not welcome"
beginners, I don't necessarily mean that they go around wearing signs that
say "no beginners 

Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

[Neotarf]

I have no way of investigating something I was not supposed to find out
about in the first place. Given Wikipedia's culture of retaliation against
anyone who speaks out, I am unlikely to find out more, but it did seem
credible. These agreements are becoming more common, for instance here a
female employee wanted to get out of her non-disparagement agreement but
Angel List said no.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/21/technology/silicon-valley-sexual-harassment-non-disparagement-agreements.html
Also the internal Google gender manifesto that was just leaked "Until about
a week ago, you would have heard very little from me publicly about this,
because (as a fairly senior Googler) my job would have been to deal with it
internally, and confidentiality rules would have prevented me from saying
much in public.But as it happens, (although this wasn’t the way I was
planning on announcing it) I actually recently left Google..."
https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-manifesto-1e3773ed1788


On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:16 AM, Risker  wrote:

>
>
> On 6 August 2017 at 23:08, Neotarf  wrote:
>
>> ..
>>
>> Women who do not want to interact on these terms, with individuals who
>> are quite probably minors, are being silenced.  I have heard that
>> professional women are being recruited for Wikipedia, women whose employers
>> would ordinarily be expected to protect them from a 'hostile work place',
>> but they are being required to post their real identities on their talk
>> pages, along with the names of their employers. and a COI form statement.
>> They are also required to sign a non-disclosure agreement that prevents
>> them from revealing any harassment they experience in Wikipedia, or from
>> even revealing they have been required to sign an NDA.  These women will
>> join Wikipedia, and listen to the pitch and eat the bagels, and Wikipedia
>> gets to count them as female editors, but very few of them go on to make
>> that second edit, because it's their professional reputation on the line.
>>
>> If Wikipedia wants women editors they are going to have to come to terms
>> with this.
>>
>>
>>
> This is a very inflammatory thing to say, Neotarf, and I need to insist
> that you show some proof of this.  Links to discussions or requirements,
> please. This is far too sensationalistic to allow it to sit here without
> serious evidence.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
> visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap