Re: [Gendergap] Meeting at the Wikiconference?

[Katherine Casey]

I will be there in my WMF staff capacity and I would love for there to be a
gendergap meetup! I'm busy from dinnertime onwards on Saturday 10/10, but
other than that I can make time for whenever works for people. A lunchtime
meetup sounds like a good place to start.

-Karen/Fluffernutter

On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 4:49 PM, Francesca Tripodi 
wrote:

> Hello list members!
>
> I am not sure if any of you are planning on attending the upcoming
> conference in DC but it would be wonderful we we could organize a meet up
> for those who might be coming. In taking a look at the schedule it seems
> that lunch will be served on the first day. Perhaps we could plan to meet
> and eat together during this time (either at the conference or venturing to
> another location)?
> http://wikiconferenceusa.org/wiki/2015/Schedule
>
> I am a graduate student working on how women and minorities are silenced
> in participatory media spaces and I'd love the chance to speak with more of
> you "off line" about your experiences.
>
> Safe travels to those attending -
> --
> Francesca Tripodi, PhD Candidate (Sociology)
> PhD Intern | Office of the Dean of Students
> ftripodi.com
>
>
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
> visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>



-- 
Karen Brown
user:Fluffernutter

*Unless otherwise specified, any email sent from this address is in my
volunteer capacity and does not represent the views or wishes of the
Wikimedia Foundation*
___
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] Wikipedia Day NYC 2015 mini-conferenceh for te project's 14th birthday

[Katherine Casey]

I recognize at least some of the names on the attendance list there as
people who don't, to the best of my knowledge, identify as being of African
descent, so it doesn't appear to have been an event that excluded anyone.
My guess would be that the open to bit is intended to bring in people who
might otherwise feel they're not welcome if they're not specifically
invited, more than it's intended to dis-invite people who already know
they're always welcome at Wikimedia events. The phrasing might be a bit
awkward, but most ways I can think of to express ...and seriously, we
would very much like those of African descent to fully participate at and
feel comfortable in this workshop suffer from one tonal weakness or
another. At the end of the day, I can't say I resent specifically inviting
racial minorities to events any more than I would resent specifically
inviting women to events; given our demographics, it's probably better to
err on the side of not making minorities feel marginalized or like they're
being treated like tokens, than it is to err on the side of making sure
white males don't feel like there might be a space where they're not the
center of things.

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Neotarf neot...@gmail.com wrote:

 That's interesting:

 The workshops are open to all Afrodescendants including but not limited
 to individuals who self-identify as African, African-American, Afro-Latino,
 Biracial, Black, Black-American, Caribbean, Garifuna, Haitian or West
 Indian.

 I've never seen editithons that exclude people before.  I've been to a
 couple of black history events, and all were welcomed, although of course
 there was a very high proportion of African descent. Likewise, the women's
 editing events I have attended have been very welcoming to men, although as
 you would expect, there is a very high attendance level for women.



 On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net
  wrote:

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Wikipedia_Day_2015

 Wikipedia Day NYC 2015 is a celebration and mini-conference for the
 project's 14th birthday,* to be held on Sunday March 22, 2015, hosted at
 Barnard College starting at 10:00 am, and also supported by Wikimedia New
 York City and fellow Free Culture Alliance NYC partners.

 There are various events, sessions, talks, etc. Nothing women oriented
 but I do see involvement by a new  NYC meetup group:
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/AfroCrowd;

 Talk page hasn't even been opened yet to comment on its goal: to
 increase the number of people of African Descent who actively partake in
 the Wikimedia and free knowledge, culture and software movements.  I guess
 meetups targeted on certain groups are less controversial than task forces.



 ___
 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] Wikipedia Day NYC 2015 mini-conferenceh for te project's 14th birthday

[Katherine Casey]

I doubt I'd attend any event purporting to recruit women that nevertheless
limited itself to people who were born female; that's very much a type of
exclusion I'm uncomfortable with. In general, however, there's nothing
stopping you or anyone else from arranging a women-centric (or even
women-only) edit-a-thon, or from reaching out to women in a certain field
(via linkedin, maybe?) to urge them to get editing. Those are both cool
ideas, and I suspect you'd get a lot of support, both from the WMF and from
the gendergap community in general, in setting such things up. NYC would
be, I suspect, a particularly fertile ground for gendergap-specific
meetups; there's enough of nearly every demographic around there to fill
some seats for a moderately-sized edit-a-thon, and the WMNYC board appears
willing to work with minority-focused groups..

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Neotarf neot...@gmail.com wrote:

 See also this article: AfroCrowd: The Black Wikipedia For People of
 African Descent http://kreyolicious.com/afrocrowd/17531/

 One of the drawbacks of GLAM is that people are just making a few edits,
 and leaving, rather than becoming long-term editors. There may be chances
 for followup here that we are missing. Is the wiki-world ready for
 WomanCrowd: The Women's Wikipedia for People Who Were Born Female?  Or
 maybe more realistically, ways for women in a particular cluster of
 professions to network with other women in their field, not to mention
 professional men who are supportive enough of women to come to one of these
 events (and who also might just happen to control access to career
 advancement).

 I have to say, though, that I totally support the idea of a Haitian
 Creole-language Wikipedia.  This language barrier was a huge problem a few
 years ago, when there was an increased number of Haitians entering the U.S.
 after the earthquake in Haiti.  The problem is the same with other
 creoles--instruction is usually given in one of the prestige languages--in
 this case French--rather than the individual's native or local village
 language, which makes communication and learning extremely difficult.

 On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Pharos pharosofalexand...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Yes, the idea is to be extra inclusionary by reaching out to all these
 groups explicitly, and in particular to representing different cultural
 identities in rather non-monolithic African American / African Diasporic
 communities.

 Thanks,
 Pharos

 On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:48 AM, Jeremy Baron jer...@tuxmachine.com
 wrote:

 On Mar 23, 2015 11:25 AM, Neotarf neot...@gmail.com wrote:
  I've never seen editithons that exclude people before.  I've been to a
 couple of black history events, and all were welcomed, although of course
 there was a very high proportion of African descent.

 I think the point was actually to be extra inclusionary: to cover all of
 the above not just a subset when recruiting new editors. So potential
 recruits don't think but I'm not really {{label}} and exclude themselves.

 I'm pretty sure others won't be excluded but these events will be
 *focused* on topics related to those groups and editors with some sort of a
 connection to Africa. To address biases similarly to women focused outreach
 but with a twist thrown in: adding a new language to Wikipedia too, they
 started already Garifuna Wikipedia on incubator.

 https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/cab

 -Jeremy

 ___
 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
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] FW: [Social-media] Blog post: Meet some of the women who contribute to Wikipedia

[Katherine Casey]

I might be a little punch-drunk from all the gender drama lately,
but...meet some of the women who edit Wikipedia! sounds more like an
introduction to a speed-dating event to me than what is presumably intended
to be a demystification/de-othering blog post. Come meet some women isn't
exactly a phrase that comes without baggage, culturally speaking, and it
makes me wince to see female editors being announced in a tone that makes
them sound like exotic zoo animals.

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 7:36 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:

 Forwarding to the Gendergap list in case others are interested, and
 forwarding to Jason and Peaceray in case they want to share this blog post
 at the Art and Feminism event in Portland, Oregon (Cascadia territory!)
 this weekend.

 Cheers,

 Pine
 On Mar 6, 2015 4:24 PM, Fabrice Florin fflo...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 Looks like the link below still had the inspire story URL in the HTML.

 Here is the correct link in plain text:


 https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/06/meet-some-women-who-contribute-to-wikipedia/

 Enjoy … and have a wonderful weekend!

 -f


 On Mar 6, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Fabrice Florin fflo...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 Hello social media team,

 We just published a roundup of some of the women who contribute to
 Wikipedia on the blog:


 https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/06/meet-some-women-who-contribute-to-wikipedia/
 https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/04/inspire-campaign-funds-gender-diversity/

 Many thanks to Andrew, Victor, Heather, and everyone who helped write and
 edit this post — as well as the many profiles and videos featured in it! :)


 Here are proposed social media messages for this story:


 Twitter (@wikimedia/@wikipedia):

 Meet some of the women who contribute to Wikipedia -- and find out why
 they do it. (link) #genderdiversity


 Facebook/Google+

 Meet some of the women who contribute to Wikipedia: To celebrate
 International Women’s Day, we've featured 11 different profiles and videos
 of frequent editors and community leaders. Hear their inspiring stories and
 find out why they keep editing. (link)


 Feel free to tweak as needed.

 Thanks for helping share this story with our community!


 Fabrice


 ___

 Fabrice Florin
 Movement Communications Manager
 Wikimedia Foundation

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fabrice_Florin_(WMF)



 ___
 Social-media mailing list
 social-me...@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media


 ___
 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] FW: [Social-media] Blog post: Meet some of the women who contribute to Wikipedia

[Katherine Casey]

Oh, I'm sure it's not at all intended! It strikes me as one of those things
that would only be recognized as A Thing by someone who was already aware
of meeting women and PUAs as A Thing (google meet women for a sense of
what I mean. For bonus ick points, google  'meet women' + PUA) .
Basically it's a phrasing which is much more commonly used in the context
of acquainting oneself with women for sexual/romantic purposes than it is
in the context of women are people, let's meet some people!

For other ideas: nearly any other phrasing - Hear from some female
wikipedians, Find out more about some of the women who edit Wikipedia,
Female Wikipedians discuss why they do what they do!, A survey of some
of Wikipedia's female editors - would communicate this is a blog post
about female wikipedians without the sort of awkward implication of
...presented here for men to examine and select from, as one does when one
'meets' women that's part of the cultural baggage of the phrase.

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 7:52 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:

 I don't think that is Fabrice's intent. What edits would you suggest?

 Pine
 On Mar 6, 2015 4:46 PM, Katherine Casey fluffernutter.w...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 I might be a little punch-drunk from all the gender drama lately,
 but...meet some of the women who edit Wikipedia! sounds more like an
 introduction to a speed-dating event to me than what is presumably intended
 to be a demystification/de-othering blog post. Come meet some women isn't
 exactly a phrase that comes without baggage, culturally speaking, and it
 makes me wince to see female editors being announced in a tone that makes
 them sound like exotic zoo animals.

 On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 7:36 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:

 Forwarding to the Gendergap list in case others are interested, and
 forwarding to Jason and Peaceray in case they want to share this blog post
 at the Art and Feminism event in Portland, Oregon (Cascadia territory!)
 this weekend.

 Cheers,

 Pine
 On Mar 6, 2015 4:24 PM, Fabrice Florin fflo...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 Looks like the link below still had the inspire story URL in the HTML.

 Here is the correct link in plain text:


 https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/06/meet-some-women-who-contribute-to-wikipedia/

 Enjoy … and have a wonderful weekend!

 -f


 On Mar 6, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Fabrice Florin fflo...@wikimedia.org
 wrote:

 Hello social media team,

 We just published a roundup of some of the women who contribute to
 Wikipedia on the blog:


 https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/06/meet-some-women-who-contribute-to-wikipedia/
 https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/04/inspire-campaign-funds-gender-diversity/

 Many thanks to Andrew, Victor, Heather, and everyone who helped write
 and edit this post — as well as the many profiles and videos featured in
 it! :)


 Here are proposed social media messages for this story:


 Twitter (@wikimedia/@wikipedia):

 Meet some of the women who contribute to Wikipedia -- and find out why
 they do it. (link) #genderdiversity


 Facebook/Google+

 Meet some of the women who contribute to Wikipedia: To celebrate
 International Women’s Day, we've featured 11 different profiles and videos
 of frequent editors and community leaders. Hear their inspiring stories and
 find out why they keep editing. (link)


 Feel free to tweak as needed.

 Thanks for helping share this story with our community!


 Fabrice


 ___

 Fabrice Florin
 Movement Communications Manager
 Wikimedia Foundation

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fabrice_Florin_(WMF)



 ___
 Social-media mailing list
 social-me...@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media


 ___
 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
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Inspire Campaign launches today!

[Katherine Casey]

If memory serves, another survey (not sure if before or after the 9%, or
where to find it, off the top of my head - maybe someone else remembers?)
came up with something like 13% female. So my guess is they added in some
margin of error, and decided less than 20% was the most accurate way to
characterize maybe 9% or 13% or something in that vicinity, give or take
some percentage points.

On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Neotarf neot...@gmail.com wrote:

 Where does the less than 20% number come from?  The last survey I see is
 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/84/December_2011_Wikipedia_Editor_Survey_topline.pdf
 this one from 2011.  On page 34 the numbers break down to 90% male, 9%
 female, 1% transgender.

 Sure 9% is less than 20%, but it is also less than 70% or 100%.  This
 seems really misleading about the scope of the problem.

 Is there more recent research that has been released, that would justify
 the use of the 20% number? The last I heard, we were still waiting for the
 results of the 2012 survey.
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research_talk:Wikipedia_Editor_Survey_2012



 On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Alex Wang aw...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 Hello Wikimedians,


 Today we are pleased to announce the launch of the Inspire Campaign in
 IdeaLab!

 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Inspire
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Inspire

 This campaign aims to encourage, foster, and support new ideas for
 improving gender diversity on Wikimedia projects. Less than 20% of
 Wikimedia contributors are women, and many important topics are still
 missing in our content. We invite all Wikimedians to participate in the
 campaign on Meta-wiki by sharing your ideas, skills and feedback, and by
 helping to spread the word in your local communities. The campaign runs
 until March 31.

 All proposals are welcome - research projects, technical solutions,
 community organizing and outreach initiatives, or something completely new!
 Grants are available from the Wikimedia Foundation for projects developed
 during this campaign that need financial support. Constructive, positive
 feedback on ideas is appreciated, and collaboration is encouraged - your
 skills and experience may help bring someone else’s project to life.  We
 hope experienced community members will also watch the IdeaLab pages to
 help keep the discussions positive and constructive. Join us at the Inspire
 Campaign and help our projects better represent the world’s knowledge!

 Cheers,

 Alex  the Inspire Team

 --
 Alexandra Wang
 Program Officer
 Project  Event Grants
 Wikimedia Foundation http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Home
 +1 415-839-6885
 Skype: alexvwang

 ___
 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] Thank someone today.

[Katherine Casey]

I have found myself using the thank button more than usual recently. In
the middle of all the turmoil that goes on onwiki, a simple hey, that
thing you did that you thought no one noticed? Yeah, thanks for doing that
goes a long way toward cancelling some of it out.

On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 6:52 PM, LB lightbreath...@gmail.com wrote:

 I agree, Kerry. I try to use the thank button at least once a day.

 Lightbreather

 On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Kerry Raymond kerry.raym...@gmail.com
 wrote:


 We talk a lot of about the culture of Wikipedia being negative, critical,
 abrasive etc; this is a turn-off to a lot of women (and also to a lot of
 men). But what can we do to change that? Well, I thought about the way
 that
 postings get Liked on Facebook. Indeed, most postings get many Likes on
 Facebook. It seems if you read something and appreciate the post in any
 way
 (which includes when you agree with the poster that it is unhappy matter
 and
 hence unlikeable matter), you click Like.

 Well, I decided to try it on Wikipedia. Now, when I run through my
 watchlist
 (which I do most mornings), instead of just looking for what's wrong and
 needs to be fixed, instead if I see a positive contribution to an article,
 even a small one, I thank the contributor for the edit.

 And if I notice I am thanking someone quite a bit, I send them some
 Wikilove
 or a Barnstar. I notice a small increase in the number of thanks I am
 receiving. While I realise this may be simple reciprocation, I'd like to
 think I might be creating a small culture of appreciation in my topic
 space,
 hoping that people choose to Pay It Forward.

 So, that's my suggestion. Try thanking people on-wiki in the various ways
 available.  Become part of the niceness culture that we'd like Wikipedia
 to
 become known for.

 Kerry



 ___
 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] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

[Katherine Casey]

Fae, this is really very off-topic for this thread at this point. Would
mind going off-list if you want to discuss personal history with others?

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 2:44 PM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:

 I suggest that as a supporter and administrator of a website that
 labels me as a faggot, and a participant and advocate of another
 website that has been home to trolling me with homophobic language for
 years, you avoid finding silly reasons to pick tiny holes in my text.

 I am in a same sex marriage recognized by UK law. Being called /a gay/
 is the least of my worries. In comparison your access to OTRS and
 personal oversighted material on Wikimedia projects worries me and
 others greatly.

 Fae

 On 26 January 2015 at 19:02, Alison Cassidy coot...@mac.com wrote:
 
  On Jan 26, 2015, at 2:43 AM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  Tarc, I felt your lipstick on a pig comment about a transexual was
  not just disgusting, but was a key example of why we needed a WM-LGBT
  user group to both highlight and gradually improve a hostile culture
  on Wikimedia projects that appeared to allow blatantly anti-LGBT
  attitudes and language on its projects under the guise of being a
  joke or teasing.
 
  Fæ, please don't refer to someone as a transsexual; it's objectifying
 and demeaning. Imagine someone calling you a gay - doesn't that just
 sound *wrong*? Adjective, not noun.
 
  -- Allie
  ___
  Gendergap mailing list
  Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
  To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
 visit:
  https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



 --
 fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

 ___
 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] Test Kaffeeklatsch area for women-only

[Katherine Casey]

*Also note many women consider cis to be an insult that eliminates
womens experience as women, who've been identified as and identify as women
from birth, and are happy and even proud to be women.*
...wha?

On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net
wrote:

  On 1/16/2015 2:20 PM, LB wrote:

 Based on a discussion at the WikiProject Women IdeaLab talk page
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Women#best_practice.3F,
 I have started a test Kaffeeklatsch
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lightbreather/Kaffeeklatsch area for
 women (cis, lesbian, transgender) only. Participation of interested women
 would be welcome.

  Lightbreather

 Since cis means non-trans male or female, where's the woman only?

 Also note many women consider cis to be an insult that eliminates womens
 experience as women, who've been identified as and identify as women from
 birth, and are happy and even proud to be women.

 CM

 ___
 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] Strong support for grants directly related to addressing the gender gap

[Katherine Casey]

This is awesome! I can't wait to see what initiatives people come up with.

On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:

 (Changing the perspective on the previous thread a bit)

 Well, it's official - the Individual Engagement Grants (IEG) and Project 
 Event Grants (PEG) will be focused almost exclusively for a 3-month period
 on providing financial support and mentorship for requests focused
 specifically at addressing the gender gap.  The funding allocated -
 $250,000, roughly equivalent to the annual budget of many large chapters -
 is very significant and should help to promote good experimentation
 throughout this area.

 If you've been thinking about a project you'd like to organize that is
 specifically gender-gap related, now's the time to start drafting your
 ideas and asking for support from the broader grants and GG community.
 You'll need to describe your idea, set some targets, and collaborate with
 others as a team for the best chance of success.

 In particular, IEGs are intended to be experiments, and there's a
 recognition that some are going to be successful, while others (even if
 they look good on paper) are not going to produce results.  The key is
 ensuring that there is some learning derived from the experiments.  Don't
 be afraid to try something!

 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

Re: [Gendergap] GGTF talk page

[Katherine Casey]

Well, how would you limit participation to just those people? There's no
page-protection option for check person's gender, then allow edits only if
'female', and Wikipedia doesn't currently have any policies that would
allow, like, topic bans from a Wikiproject based on gender rather than
problematic behavior. I imagine the community would be vehemently opposed
to such things, and for good reason. Forcing people to identify to
participate, or sanctioning people when they've done nothing but been the
wrong gender, are antithetical to Wikipedia's anyone can participate
ethos.

If you were setting something up offwiki, not in association with
Wiki[m|p]edia, you'd be as free as anyone else to set your own criteria for
membership, but the problem then becomes a) attracting enough high-quality
participation b) without becoming a cabal in the style of the EEML
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern_European_mailing_list
that got people in so much trouble a few years ago.

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 10:59 AM, LB lightbreath...@gmail.com wrote:

 Well, I'm brainstorming, but yes... a project that is only open to women
 or those who identify as women. And yes, that would mean identifying (via
 one's she edits preference - as I know of no other ways to identify,
 right?) Hypothetically, is there anything to prevent us from doing it?

 (I just went and re-identified as she edits. I had turned that off for a
 while when I first started getting harassed, but WTF. I'm tired of hiding.
 I'll bet other women are tired of hiding, too.)


 Lightbreather

 On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:

 Could you please clarify, Lightbreather?  Do you mean a wikiproject that
 is *only* open to women/those who identify as women?  Because all
 wikiprojects are open to all interested editors, generally speaking.

 Would that not require editors to have to publicly self-identify?  How
 would that be done?

 Risker/Anne

 On 31 December 2014 at 10:31, LB lightbreath...@gmail.com wrote:

 Is it simply impossible to start a Wikipedia project that's open to
 women, or people who identify as women? (I'm sorry if I don't use the
 correct terms, but I haven't kept up with them in recent years.)

 I mean if we did it... what would the consequences be?


 Lightbreather

 On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 7:43 PM, LB lightbreath...@gmail.com wrote:

 Why abandon it? Let's reclaim it. Just ignore those who try to
 distract and derail. There are sanctions so no nastiness, but nastiness is
 not my usual style anyway.


 ​I don't know whether it's better to abandon, reclaim or move it. But
 it has been a lesson in how deep Wikipedia's sexism runs. Any journalists
 in future wanting examples of it need only read those archives and the
 dispute-resolution threads that failed to deal with it (which one of us
 ought to compile at some point).

 Marie, I saw the suggestion on GGTF that women might prefer to edit
 [f]ashion, cookery, domestic affairs, childrearing. Is it worth
 continuing with it when that's what we have to deal with?

 Sarah

 ​


 On Dec 30, 2014 10:25 AM, Marie Earley eir...@hotmail.com wrote:

 We're abandoning the GGTF on Wikipedia? Fair enough.

 It was just that I had an editor accused me of radical feminism POV
 pushing on GGTF via my talk page (I dared to say that it was 
 interesting
 that the example topics that he thought women would be interested in
 editing, other than feminism, might be *fashion, cookery, domestic
 affairs and childrearing* rather than *science, business,
 filmmaking or politics*). There was then this follow-on swipe on
 GGTF.

  ...one of the reasonable first steps toward seeing what women in
 wikipedia thinks needs to be done most would be to actively ask women who
 have self-identified as women what content of particular interest to 
 women
 might be underrepresented or undercovered here. Those women would
 presumably be in a better position to clearly state their concerns than
 would be individuals who can only speculate on them or draw potentially
 flawed assumptions based on limited previous personal experience.

 So, my potentially flawed assumptions and limited previous personal
 experience are surplus to requirements at the GGTF. The plan now seems to
 go out and find answers that fit a pre-existing narrative about what is
 causing the Gender Gap.

 So...  I believe the Gender Gap is caused by women who want to write
 about knitting thinking that Wikipedia does not welcome articles about
 knitting. I will create a skewed survey to fit this narrative and get 
 the
 right kind of women to fill it in and prove my pre-conceived notions
 correct.

 I really don't see the point of it. If you ask 1,000 female editors,
 What kind of articles do you like to edit?, then you'll get 1,000 
 answers
 with a wide variety of topics. What would that prove? Suppose you find 
 90%
 of them edit 

Re: [Gendergap] Arbcom election

[Katherine Casey]

What proportion of the rest had accounts explicitly marked as male? My
first thought is that most people of all genders probably get to that
section of Preferences, go Why would mediawiki want to know my gender in
the first place? This is dumb and skip it. Or they never fiddle with their
preferences to that extent in the first place.

Keep in mind also that identifies in preferences as female is not a
unified set with is female, as you noted. Just glancing at a couple
screens' worth of the log I see a handful of users who I know to be, or
know probably are, female. So I'm hesitant to draw any gender-proportion
conclusions from whether or not people ticked a somewhat obscure box.

This doesn't mean that female voters probably aren't very much in the
minority in the election, but given what we already know about proportion
of females on Wikipedia as a whole, that's entirely consistent with what
expectations would be.

On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:

 Checking the votes at
 
 https://vote.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?limit=1000title=Special%3ASecurePoll%2Flist%2F392dir=prev
 
 against the English Wikipedia database, shows an interesting
 statistic. Of the 590 votes cast only *one* voter has an account
 marked with their gender as female.

 Obviously many people prefer not to use the user preferences on-wiki
 to mark their gender, however it still seems a remarkably low figure
 for a project which has a strategic objective to be welcoming to users
 who identify as women.

 Fae
 --
 fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Survey re: gender gap

[Katherine Casey]

I just tried to take it and it ended abruptly with You have already taken
this survey. after about five pages (the last button I filled in was
rating something like I avoid certain areas of the community because I
have been harassed). Does that mean the survey was complete, or did I hit
a bug?

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Amanda Menking amenk...@uw.edu wrote:

  Hi,

  I’ve just activated a survey re: the gender gap, primarily on the EN
 Wiki: https://jfe.qualtrics.com/form/SV_cILwYSqJB58SgFn

  This survey is a part of ongoing research related to an IEG:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Women_and_Wikipedia

  If you have 10-20 minutes, I would greatly appreciate your
 participation. Also, please feel free to share the link to the survey to
 editors of all sexes and genders who are not on this mailing list.

  This survey is open to ALL editors who contribute to the English
 language Wikipedia. It does not require or record your user name or real
 name.

  If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to email me via
 amend...@uw.edu or reach out to User:Mssemantics.

  Thanks!
 Amanda Menking





 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Wikipedia and the war on women’s dignity

[Katherine Casey]

I don't think it's appropriate to use this list to link to pages that out
other users. I understand your frustration with nothing onwiki getting
done, Carol, I truly do, but part of the social contract of being a
Wikipedian is that we're expected to not attack the real lives of other
Wikipedians - even when we think they're terrible or totally wrong.

On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 6:44 PM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net
wrote:

  Wikipedia and the war on women’s dignity

 http://wikipediocracy.com/2014/09/07/wikipedia-and-the-war-on-womens-dignity/

 This article mentions an individual who's caused problems at the Gender
 Gap task force.

 Off wiki sites engaging in outing is, like hashtags, a two edged sword.
 It can be used against truly problematic individuals who troll behind
 anonymity.  But it also can be used against solid editors whose job or
 other situation necessitates anonymity but who have angered the wrong troll
 by trying to comply with policy.

 And the absurdities continue

 CM



 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] A cautionary tale

[Katherine Casey]

Responding to this on my phone, so please excuse what I assume will be
wonky formatting/quoting, but:

Derric, you say you hope your email didn't come across as shouting over the
women or generalizing about them,  but to me it did (and I say this not
just to make you feel bad - I see you've already apologized in another
thread - but to make a larger point). This is something women online In
general, and women on this list especially, in my experience, face very
often: a discussion about how we feel unwelcome and talked over is
responded to by a man saying, now, now, let's not be mean and hurt men's
feelings or well that's not what I intended!or all this argument won't
fix anything! When was the last time someone stepped into a conversation
among men and said Oh now boys, stop being so mean or you're hurting my
feelings by talking about something that needs to be fixed,  I insist you
stop? It's a condescending approach that is pretty much only deployed
against women, this sense that fighting, or even disagreeing in a way that
makes men feel like imperfect allies, is somehow unseemly and should be
stopped. And again, I don't think you intended condescension,  but the
world condescends using those same terms/arguments.

Though the words may be the same, i stopped posting because men started
shouting over me and i stopped posting because women started shouting
over me come from very different places and mean very different thing to
the people involved  in those sentences.  Similarly, to respond to
something someone else said, is NOT an equivalent experience for two women
to be vocal in disagreement and a man to find it unattractive/annoying
and thus tune it out,  and for women to stop speaking because they feel
that whenever they share their experiences, men jump in to say yes but
and derail the conversation. One results in a man rolling his eyes; the
other results in women literally feeling unsafe and unwelcome in a
discussion space.

Part of being a productive ally is a willingness to listen to and believe
experiences people tell you about, even when hearing them feels like you're
being confronted about something you didn't personally do.
On Jun 23, 2014 11:47 AM, Derric Atzrott datzr...@alizeepathology.com
wrote:

 Moriel,



 I meant no offense.  My reason for posting that email was that I was
 feeling uncomfortable with the direction that the discussion was going.  I
 intentionally left my email non-specific in an attempt to prevent offense
 to anyone.  I think you may have misunderstood me.



 “A lot of women used to be outspoken about all this here when this email
 list started, but that stopped after a bunch of guys joined and started
 hassling them about it.  SURPRISE!!”



 This comment to me comes off as exactly the opposite of the sort of thing
 that I would want to see on this list.  We are here to cooperate on
 reducing the gender-gap and this means that we should all work civilly
 together to do so.  This comment to me sounds very similar to some of the
 common things that I see men say towards or around women.  I can understand
 the frustration that might be being felt in that comment.  I would love to
 see more outspokenness myself even.  The topic of the gender gap and the
 way that women are treated online, in person, and on Wikimedia is a real
 problem that a lot of people try to push under the rug.  I think that the
 majority of the men on this list though are here because we recognise it is
 an issue and would like to do something about it.  I felt that the comment
 was worded in such a way that it alienated the people like myself who are
 completely disturbed by the gender gap problem and are trying very hard to
 try to understand and work on fixing it.  To put it another way: “but that
 stopped after a bunch of women joined and started hassling them about it.
 SURPRISE!!” wouldn’t be appropriate on-wiki, and I don’t think that this
 comment was appropriate here.



 “By looking at this directory, I can tell that I mostly stopped reading
 this list in January 2012, one week after a fight between two vocal women.”



 This comment also creates a hostile environment that I don’t think is
 conducive to unsurprisingly is not conducive to resolving the hostile
 environment problem.  This reply reminded me of how shouting matches
 begin.  The thread is not an argument about which gender on-list makes the
 place the most hostile.  This comment made me just as uncomfortable as the
 one made before it.



 My intention was to remind everyone that this is a list for discussion of
 the gender gap and ways to fix it.  It is not a list for shouting at each
 other, which is what I felt was about to happen.  I was trying to diffuse a
 situation that in my mind could have gotten out of hand.  It appears
 instead I just managed to bugger things up, for which I apologise.



 “That is *not* to say they shouldn't participate: they absolutely should.
 But they should understand that the dynamic between 

Re: [Gendergap] A cautionary tale

[Katherine Casey]

Actually, I think there's something to be said for downvoting. Not in the
reddit i disagree sense, but in the slashdot/ meta filter comments
downvoted/flagged past a certain point will be hidden/deleted sense. It
would obviously take a lot of work to make that work within the media wiki
software *and* the Wikimedia ethos, but it would probably save tons of
grief and derails if the worst of the worst comments were limited by
crowdsourced review.
On Jun 23, 2014 12:47 PM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case 
danc...@frontiernet.net wrote:

 MediaWiki's mostly impersonal interaction helps a lot here.


 No image avatars, no upvoting or downvoting of comments (something I don't
 see the utility of on either Reddit or Quora, FTM). Maybe the features are
 what we *don't* have.

 Daniel Case

 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] New York Magazine article summaries the gender gap issue in one conversation

[Katherine Casey]

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/06/love-and-drama-at-the-wikipedia-conference.html

One quote, of many possible ones:

 “We're really the typical demographic, actually,” says Alex Stinson, back
 on the leather couches.

 “White, male techies with college degrees,” agrees Kevin Rutherford. “Not
 you, though,” he says, squinting at a young woman who has silently joined
 the group, pale with dyed black hair and a skeptical, Daria-like
 http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/06/redir.aspx?C=siqEisgg1EiT2llJkdzfjJeTmVYdVdEIU8bniJP-O9F0bAkwyWbDgU4MslzA9cO4HJ9cu_kznC8.URL=http%3a%2f%2fen.wikipedia.org%2fwiki%2fDaria
 expression. “Are you a contributor?”

 “Yes,” she says, her eyes narrowing.

 “Do you have a college degree?” Kevin asks.

 “Yes,” she says, a bit harder.

 “So you're like, completely out there,” he says, flustered. “In that
 you're not like us, but you have a college degree,” he adds hastily. “I
 mean, you are like us, but you’re not.” He sputters on for a few minutes.


I don't suppose anyone knows who the daria-like female editor was? I
think we collectively owe her an apology.

-Fluffernutter
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] interviews for Women Wikipedia IEG

[Katherine Casey]

I've looked into this a bit. The page history is difficult to interpret,
because it now shows non-contiguous edits as contiguous (a side effect of
the attending administrator trying to delete versions that contained
copyright violations and keep ones that didn't), but the upshot is that the
content of the article that was being reverted was an extremely close
paraphrasing of a 2009 book called *The Library: An Illustrated History *by
Stuart Murray (it's available in Google Books in the US, but I can't figure
out how to link directly to it). The article did cite this work as a
source, but represented the Wikipedia text as the article author's own (it
did not enclose any of the copied text in quotations, and even if it had,
we're not permitted to wholesale-copy others' work). That's a pretty clear
violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:COPYVIO), and it looks like people
did try to explain that on the user's talk page but it just wasn't coming
through clearly, for whatever reason. I do not think the onwiki portion of
this situation had anything to do with the gender of the contributors.

All of that, however, is quite apart from Kathleen's point about how women
can be more easily driven away by criticism and aggression. Almost all of
us made mistakes as new editors (and continue to make mistakes as old
editors!), and how those mistakes are responded to - and how we, in turn,
interpret those responses - can very easily sway whether we stay or go.

-Fluffernutter


On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Derric Atzrott datzr...@alizeepathology.com
 wrote:

 One especially disturbing event was a student editing the entry on the
 national library of Pakistan. Someone claimed she was violating
 copyright and deleted her work. it was even deleted from the history
 logs somehow.  I went to the library and added a number of citations
 to strengthen the entry. These, too, were deleted claiming copyright.
 Someone just DID NOT want that entry edited. This kind of experience
 discourages people and in my teaching it seems to discourage women
 more than men.

 Do you know what admin it was?  I'd love to hear their rationale and
 perhaps bring up some type of discussion on-wiki about them if their
 deletions were inappropriate.

 Thank you,
 Derric Atzrott


 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] can the Commons images thread move?

[Katherine Casey]

I'm not sure I see the pressing reason why this thread needs to go on-wiki.
Commons doesn't have a venue for discussing problems this fundamental with
it as far as I know, and people have spoken in this thread who either do
not or will not participate on-wiki on Commons. Moving the thread on-wiki
would mean scattering it to some random page, losing the voices of the
people who aren't on Commons for whatever reasons, and subjecting everyone
else to the defensiveness that's the reason this thread grew traction here
instead of the dozens of times it's been brought up on various wikis.

This mailing list was never intended to be a ooh happy!-only venue where
we only post announcements about courses and case studies - one-liners
about positive steps are good, but so are tough discussions like this one,
 and given that this is one of the very, very few safe venues for that
type of discussion, I'm saddened to see people trying to shove this off the
list.

-Fluff


On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote:

 I agree with Sarah: the thread should stay, tagged with [Commons] as Erik
 has suggested.

 We are actually making progress – painful progress at times, but
 significant progress nevertheless.

 Andreas

 On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 7:46 AM, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:21 PM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.comwrote:

 Sumana,

 Yes, gladly. I feel that thread has served a good purpose, but it's
 true, it's been at the expense of flooding the list with a lot of noise,
 and I've contributed some of it. I do think that after a prolonged long dip
 into less productive discussion, in the last exchange we have arrived at a
 point where there is some consensus about what the problems are and how to
 attack them, and hopefully we can leverage that into some policy reform
 that moves the project forward. But you're right, it would be better at
 this point to move that activity onto a wiki.


 Hi Sumana and Pete, I would object to closing any thread down. If people
 don't want to read the thread, that's fine, but if others are discussing
 it, please allow that.

 The presence of this kind of material on Commons is directly related to
 the whole issue of sexism on Wikipedia and the lack of women editors, and
 that makes it a very valid topic for the gender-gap list. I can't imagine a
 more valid topic than women being represented sexually without their
 consent on Wikimedia projects. If discussing it on this list brings people
 together and edges us closer to a solution that would surely be a really
 good outcome for the list.

 Sarah

 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Sexuality-related userboxen: give me your thoughts!

[Katherine Casey]

(Correction: the first abstinence userbox reads This user practices
abstinence, not This user practices abstinence but still has a healthy
sex drive thank you very much.)


On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Katherine Casey 
fluffernutter.w...@gmail.com wrote:

 I've noticed that enwp has a *lot* of sexuality-related userboxen. Some
 of these are innocuous or positive (i.e.
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:UBX/LGBTsupport), some seem to be a bit
 over-share-y (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:UBX/abstinence_reluctant),
 and some seem downright creepy to me (
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:UBX/girlfriendwish). When you put them
 together (for example, as found on the - real but anonymized - userpage
 excerpt here http://gyazo.com/fa31a70c0b5bf29600a3058ae6dc4d6e), you
 can very easily end up with what feels like a very, very sexualized
 userpage, which means a very, very sexualized user experience for anyone
 who visits that page. Reading the userpage that screenshot came from, for
 example, gave me the feeling that anyone female who speaks to that user is
 going to be evaluated for their sexual usefulness to the user.

 Userboxen can be a sensitive issue, historically speaking, and everyone
 seems to draw the line differently between appropriate ones and
 inappropriate ones. I'm interested in getting some thoughts on where the
 line is, and on whether the ones that cross the line inappropriately
 sexualize the atmosphere on the project. My personal feeling is something
 along the lines of Speaking out about your sexual identity is good, but I
 don't want to hear about what specific sexual characteristics you have or
 want your sexual partners to have. I'd welcome the lists's thoughts on
 whether any, some, or none of the following userboxen (not an exhaustive
 list of sexuality-related ones, just some I've pulled out as good examples
 of the question) are appropriate to have hosted and used on our projects:


- Abstinence:
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:UBX/abstinence (This user
   practices abstinence but still has a healthy sex drive thank you very
   much.)
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:UBX/abstinence_sex_drive (This
   user practices abstinence but still has a healthy sex drive thank you 
 very
   much.)
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:UBX/abstinence_not_SRT (This
   user practices abstinence for religious reasons, but disagrees with the
   Silver Ring Thing.)
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:UBX/abstinence_unsure (This
   user practices abstinence but is not sure whether through shyness or
   through moral choice.)
   - Fetishes/philias/sexual identity:
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:UBX/aquaphile (This user is an
   aquaphile.)
   -
   
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dark_Tichondrias/Userboxes/User_Cross-dressing(This
  user enjoys cross-dressing.)
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ISD/Userboxes/Dominant (This
   user is a dominant. - also available in sub)
   -
   
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Oxguy3/myboxes/Straight_not_narrow(This 
 user is straight, but not narrow.)
   - 
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cadwaladr/Userboxes/Pornography(This user 
 enjoys pornography.)
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:UBX/slut (This user is a
   slut.)
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:UBX/swinger (This user enjoys
   a varied sex life.)
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:UBX/yiff (This user loves
   yiff, and is probably a furry.)
   - Preferences for sexual partners:
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bluedenim/Blondes (This user
   considers blond hair to be attractive. - also available for brunnettes,
   redheads)
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:UBX/girlfriendwish (This user
   wishes [they] had a girlfriend)
   - Miscellaneous sexuality-related:
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:UBX/safesex (This user
   supports and encourages the practice of safe sex.)
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:UBX/sex (This user enjoys
   sex.)
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:TBM10/Uncircumcised (This user
   is proudly uncircumcised)
   -
   
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sugar_Bear/Userboxes/User_varied_sex(This 
 user enjoys a varied sex life. (Alternating between hands
   constitutes varied, right?))
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:User_Single (This user is
   single)


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] can the Commons images thread move?

[Katherine Casey]

Phoebe, I would really suggest reading the emails if you're interested in
the discussion (or, conversely, not asking for a summary if you're not),
but here's a quick-and-dirty condensation off the top of my head:

I started the thread to discuss how disposition of topless photo of a woman
on Commons (being used on enwp), and that woman's right to consent or not
consent to the photo being used, was being discussed entirely by men. The
conversation then veered to how sexual images on Commons are a
nearly-intractable problem and how Commons can be unwelcoming to people who
try to discuss them, then to discussion of the Board's resolution that we
must be sensitive to people's identity rights when photos are from private
places, then to how Commons does or doesn't adhere to that resolution, then
to how to *make *Commons adhere (better) to that resolution. There is no
final result; there is only a general feeling that Commons's common
practice is in dispute with how some people interpret the Board's
resolution, that other people feel Commons is already making huge
concessions to the ideas in the resolution, and that some individual images
and categories of images are rather blatant violations of Commons's and/or
the Board's policies/resolutions.

Hope this helps.

-Fluff


On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 11:51 AM, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.comwrote:

 Well, I haven't read ANY of the emails in the thread, for the petty reason
 that the subject line makes me cringe every time I see it. And according to
 my gmail count there's something like 100 mails on the topic, so I'm
 probably not going to start now. So if indeed there is actual progress
 being made, if someone could post a 1-para summary of the discussion and
 what the conclusions are, that would be awesome!

 (seriously. Refactoring is almost always a helpful exercise when it comes
 to long discussions on complicated issues -- for both the participants 
 those who haven't been following the discussion).

 -- phoebe

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Topless image retention -don't give up

[Katherine Casey]

Russavia and Andreas, I want to take this opportunity to point out that the
style of argument the two of you have been engaged in since last night is
exactly what some of us mean when we refer to an aggressive atmosphere
that makes us uncomfortable on the projects. Turning a disagreement over
how to apply policy into you are this, and two years ago you said that,
and your friend's boss once did this other thing, all in an attempt to
discredit the other person, is not a constructive way to make one's own
point. It doesn't actually strengthen either side's argument; it only
escalates the entire dispute.

It is entirely possible to disagree - vehemently - without the ad hominems,
the dirt digging background research, and general aggressive posturing
we're seeing here. In an atmosphere where one doesn't feel one can disagree
with someone without being subjected to those things, the idea of speaking
up, or even of participating silently, becomes increasingly unattractive.

-Fluff


On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 3:09 AM, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.comwrote:

 Hello again Andreas

 On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote:

  If you look at the upload stream, they come up quite regularly, including
  images of minors, uploaded again and again under different user names,
  according to a mail I received from Philippe a couple of months ago. I'm
  told Flickr delete those within two hours; if true, that is significantly
  faster than the Wikimedia response.

 You are wrong yet again. I am speaking from experience here, and
 inappropriate images have been removed within minutes of them being
 brought to our attention. Odder, a Commons oversighter also verifies
 this at
 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#Making_it_easier_for_problematic_files_to_be_brought_to_our_attention
 where he states:

 as all reports of potentially illegal content are responded to within
 a few hours (sometimes even minutes), which is much better than the 12
 hours than Flickr takes pride in.

 12 hours being the length of time it was quoted by one of your cohorts.

 Also, Andreas, for someone who is so interested in Commons and having
 images removed and having a streamlined reporting process, it is most
 curious as to why you haven't commented in that thread above, and
 added your support to it.

 Or is it easier to ignore the fact that we on Commons are being
 pro-active in issues such as this and keep peddling OMG COMMONS IS
 BROKEN in venues such as this.

 Any other reports you have to make are also best done on Commons, so
 that our admins can deal with them within our processes. I believe
 this has been told to you on numerous occasions now, amirite?

 Your contribs (
 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jayen466)
 and deleted contribs
 (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:DeletedContributions/Jayen466)
 clearly demonstrate that it is more important for you to troll off the
 project, than it is do anything remotely useful on the project.

 Regards,

 Russavia

 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] avoiding another categorygate

[Katherine Casey]

Allegations of prostitution are allegations of illegal activities in many
jurisdictions, which makes any unsourced edits accusing people in
those jurisdictions of prostitution potentially libelous. I'm going to look
over the category myself, but please please, anyone else who does so (or
already has...Kaldari), please report specific articles/edits that have
this issue to the oversight
teamhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Oversight/FAQ#How_to_request_suppression
(or
just send them to me at this email address) so we can deal with them from
that angle.

-Fluffernutter


On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.orgwrote:

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_**
 Feminism#Help_cleaning_up_**Category:Prostituteshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Feminism#Help_cleaning_up_Category:Prostitutes

 Ryan Kaldari

 __**_
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/gendergaphttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Topless image retention -don't give up

[Katherine Casey]

Alas no, I'm not up to your challenge. I'm subject to quite enough
aggression and strange sexualization of situations on enwp; I don't have
the energy to dive headfirst into an even worse atmosphere of those things
on Commons. I'm much more comfortable speaking here, in an environment of
respect and support, than I would ever be there, in an environment where my
right to my opinions would be challenged and I'd be shouting into a void
while thinking that at any moment someone was going to ask me to show my
tits.

Not everyone has unlimited tolerance for doing things that make them very
uncomfortable; as someone whose tolerance for that is perhaps lower than
some other people's, my hope is that my voice here, where I *am *comfortable
speaking, will be heard - as it seems to be, given this thread and the
inroads that have been made on Commons as a result of it - and that my
speaking here it will provide support to the people who *are *willing to
brave that environment.

-Fluff


On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.comwrote:

 Hey Fluff,

 Indeed we did have a conversation on IRC the other day. You and I may not
 agree on numerous things, and in many instances we have very similar views
 (but perhaps you just aren't aware of it), but one thing we surely can
 agree on is that by only commenting on this list is not having your voice
 heard in the place where it matters -- and that is on Commons.

 I urged you the other day to come and join us on the project, noting that
 you don't have many contributions there (
 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Fluffernutter),
 and I am again urging you to come and join us.

 Are you up for that challenge?

 Cheers,

 Russavia


 On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 3:36 AM, Katherine Casey 
 fluffernutter.w...@gmail.com wrote:

 Russavia, from the perspective of many people here, blowing hot air on
 Commons is the least likely to bring about change of any of the options you
 mention. I know you don't agree with that (you and I had quite a long IRC
 conversation the other day where you made that clear), but it is the
 genuine impression many, many of us have been left with after watching how
 discussions tend to go there.

 -Fluff



 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Topless image retention -don't give up

[Katherine Casey]

From a common-sense perspective, Pete, I'd say that if the image was taken
in a private place, shows an identifiable person, and that person does not
give permission for us to be using their likeness, it should be a
no-brainer that we don't have the right (ethically, at least, in light of
the board resolution) to continue using their photo in defiance of that. So
a good outcome to my mind would have been asking the person to verify
that they are who they say they are, and if that checks out, deleting the
image. In scope, which is the content of the actual close there, is
pretty much a non-sequitur (and is yet another example of why Commons
adminning is sometimes viewed as completely...shall we say tone deaf?...to
actual concerns about images), as it fails to address that issue.

Or, to tl;dr it: As far as I'm concerned, if the person had an expectation
of privacy and didn't consent to public distribution of their image, it
doesn't matter whether it's their breasts or just their face that's
featured - we should not be hosting it.

-Fluff


On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.comwrote:

 I think it's easier to discuss the challenges associated with the board
 resolution in question, if we can leave aside the question of nudity for a
 moment. Here is a simple example of an ordinary portrait taken in a
 (presumably) private setting in a library:


 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Karen_Stollznow_2.jpg

 The subject of the photo (as far as we know) explicitly stated she did
 *not* give consent. But the closing administrator didn't consider that
 compelling enough.

 What would be a good outcome in this case?

 And, more generally, how can resolution language be structured in a way
 that best achieves desirable outcomes, and doesn't have undesirable ones?
 That's the core question here, and the way this discussion is heading isn't
 getting us closer to an answer.

 Pete
 [[User:Peteforsyth]]

 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Topless image retention -don't give up

[Katherine Casey]

Oh dear, I'm not sure there's enough vodka in the universe for us all to
play that drinking game, Daniel! Especially given that closed by Mattbuck
as delete probably ought to be a finish your drink qualifier...

-Fluffernutter


On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 10:55 PM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case 
danc...@frontiernet.net wrote:

   It took me one minute to find the uploads of this user:

 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Austin_photoguy50

 Please nominate all of them for deletion. I will be interested in
 watching how what goes.

 Done. With the WMF resolution linked and quoted at length.


 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_of_Austin_photoguy50

 Maybe we should have a drinking game based on this:

 One drink:

 Keep !vote saying all that matters is that it’s a free image
 Keep !vote saying it’s censorship
 Delete !vote from a regular participant on this list
 User who !votes keep following up every delete vote with a comment.
 Claim that someone has the subjects’ permission on OTRS if we all just
 wait a while.
 Closed by Mattbuck as keep.

 Two drinks:

 User who !votes keep following up every delete !vote with a comment that
 actually makes a legitimate counterargument to the delete !vote.
 Keep !vote from regular participant on this list.
 Keep !vote that trashes the Foundation and/or board in the I just like
 sticking it to the Man!” vein.
 Keep !vote arguing that society is too prudish and subjects need to get
 over that.
 Closed by another admin as keep.

 Three drinks:

 Closed by Mattbuck as delete.

 Daniel Case


 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Topless image retention on Commons and use on enwp

[Katherine Casey]

Came across this kerfuffle today. I'd love to see what more
gendergap-focused people think about the following progression of events
(note: the image is NSFW, but each of the links I'm providing are SFW if
you don't click through to the image/article):

   - 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Exhibitionism#Image_at_top_of_page---discussion
about whether to use an identifiable woman's topless photo
   on the top of an enwp article. The person raising the discussion notes
   that *I find it hard to believe that this woman wants her picture on
   WP,  and I don't think we have a right to show her because of a momentary
   indiscretion in a public place.*
   -
   
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Mardi_Gras_Flashing_-_Color.jpg#File:Mardi_Gras_Flashing_-_Color.jpg---Same
image is nominated for deletion on Commons, with similar rationale
   - The image is kept.
   - Discussion on enwp spins off from the same issue:
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BLPN#Photos_of_private_people_doing_things_they_might_be_embarrassed_about_later,
splitting between one faction saying It's legal, so it's fine and
   another saying It's a matter of ethics, not legality.

Speaking personally, my takeaway from reading through this situation has
gone through mortification in empathy for the image subject, who was
almost certainly drunk and unable to consent, frustration with Commons's
dismissive approach to the questioning of identfiable sexual images, and
finally realization that in all three discussions, I see *no *users who I
know to be female. Not one. It seems quite likely that the issue of whether
this woman's right to be protected by BLP extends to images of her
breasts...is being discussed 100% by men.

I don't quite know what my point is here, other than to note that to me,
this feels very, very representative of the way women and women's issues
are treated on WP and on Commons, even when we're supposed to be
hyper-aware of the gendergap and its effects, and it depresses me.

-Fluffernutter
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Topless image retention on Commons and use on enwp

[Katherine Casey]

Yeah, the sheer domination by numbers of masculine voices - even when
they're not *trying *to argue from a particularly masculine perspective,
can just be draining in situations like this. *Especially* when they're not
trying to argue from a particularly masculine perspective, frankly, because
it's very hard to get across I know you're not *trying *to ignore the
value of a slightly different perspective, but... without making them feel
like they need to defend themselves and go on about how we're reading into
them things they're not saying, they're not biased, men are capable of
being open-minded, there's no single male perspective, etc. All those
things are true, and before any of our male allies on this list get upset,
I want to acknowledge that...but at the same time, that gender-related
invisible knapsack http://ted.coe.wayne.edu/ele3600/mcintosh.html can
just sort of steer male-dominated discussions in directions that a more
gender-balanced conversation might not swerve, or might not swerve so
strongly.

Commons, especially, is just completely dominated by certain viewpoints
with regard to sexual images, and Sarah, you get tons of my respect for
just *attempting *to function there, because I certainly can't do it. I
might be able to handle an inadvertent boys-zone atmosphere - I hang out on
enwp, after all - but my blood pressure just can't handle the level of
aggression Commons bring to bear on anyone who dares speak for the deletion
of potentially-damaging images.

Most days, it's hard to feel like it's worth it to join conversations that
are already immovable brick walls of a particular, usually-unconscious male
POV.

-Fluff

P.S. On re-reading the threads from my original email, I note that I was
wrong about the 100% male thing - Beria Lima commented twice. So uh,
99.999% male?


On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.comwrote:

 Sorry if this gets a little off topic from the actual focus of the
 subjects. I just need to personally vent and this gives me a chance (thanks
 Katherine). I assume I can't be the only one who feels this way, and it
 seems you might also.

 I totally understand the it depresses me situation. I got involved in
 some of the discussions about the women's foo categories only to get
 bombarded with comments when I brought up I don't know if anyone here is
 even a woman involved, from what I know, I think I might be the only woman
 here, and then to be snapped at How do you know I'm not a woman? by
 someone with a male user name (Jeremy). I felt like a total fail, and
 basically left the conversation only to get comments on my talk page. I
 have officially declared I'm burnt out on any and all gender
 conversations, specifically triggered by the recent category situation.

 95% if not more of the people discussing all of these things are, from
 what I believe, identifying on Wikipedia as the masculine. It's really
 troubling for me, and right now I'm at the point where I just can't fight
 it right now. I'm feeling depressed about it, hopeless, and all of the
 other fun things that go with burn out. (Funny, I didn't suffer burn out
 this severe when I was a fellow, but I did have two minor bouts of burn out
 during that year, this is by far the worst)

 I basically had to stop doing the painful nomination and arguing about
 nudity and women's images on Commons. Part of this was because it was so
 demoralizing and depressing, and the other was the repeated You'll never
 be an admin on Commons if you keep doing this, and I always wanted to be
 an admin on Commons. The fact that I let this argument - being made by male
 Commonists - trigger me to not participate in the conversations is an
 entirely different psychological issue in itself! Oy vey.

 Gah. :(

 -Sarah


 On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 8:08 AM, Katherine Casey 
 fluffernutter.w...@gmail.com wrote:

 Came across this kerfuffle today. I'd love to see what more
 gendergap-focused people think about the following progression of events
 (note: the image is NSFW, but each of the links I'm providing are SFW if
 you don't click through to the image/article):

- 
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Exhibitionism#Image_at_top_of_page---discussion
  about whether to use an identifiable woman's topless photo
on the top of an enwp article. The person raising the discussion notes
that *I find it hard to believe that this woman wants her picture on
WP,  and I don't think we have a right to show her because of a momentary
indiscretion in a public place.*
-

 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Mardi_Gras_Flashing_-_Color.jpg#File:Mardi_Gras_Flashing_-_Color.jpg---Same
  image is nominated for deletion on Commons, with similar rationale
- The image is kept.
- Discussion on enwp spins off from the same issue:

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BLPN#Photos_of_private_people_doing_things_they_might_be_embarrassed_about_later,
  splitting

Re: [Gendergap] I f***ing love science

[Katherine Casey]

Having an ungendered username gets me some interesting interactions when
people assume that because I'm not explicitly female, I must be male. Had a
fun experience on IRC last night where I asked someone to stop making jokes
about women's boobs because it sounded pretty creepy toward all women,
and got the reply well, it's not like there's any women active in here,
but sure I guess [...] When I kind of went uh...ahem in reply, they were
aghast that they'd been talking to a woman all this time and not realized
it.

Which sort of neatly encapsulates two sides of the problem - when people
assume the a female name is female, their actions change to suit that
(whether suiting it in their mind is being kinder, making boob jokes,
being more dominant, whatever). When they assume that everyone is the
default gender unless otherwise specified, though, or that women aren't
and couldn't be present for whatever reason, it doesn't even cross their
minds to change their actions.

-Fluffernutter

On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 5:00 AM, Jane Darnell jane...@gmail.com wrote:

 That is interesting! Of course according to the latest stats, chances
 are 87% that any Wikipedian on the English Wikipedia is male (and we
 just found out this month that in the Dutch Wikipedia, 94% are male).
 It would be definitely interesting to fund some research on this
 specific issue (how people react in AfD discussions to
 girlish-named-Wikipedians based on female gender assumptions). This
 week similar research was published on the use of the Wikipedia
 Ignore all rules policy in AfD's:

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2013-03-25/Recent_research

 2013/3/31, Risker risker...@gmail.com:
  On 30 March 2013 22:39, Daniel and Elizabeth Case
  danc...@frontiernet.netwrote:
 
 
   Thank you for sharing this Jane. It's amazing that it's still such an
  issue but yeah, a great example of how deeply rooted our presumptions
  are.
 
  This actually happened to me, in a way, with one now long-departed
  Wikipedia editor. Despite a female-suffixed username*, I assumed this
  editor was a male because she was a flagrant asshole in some AfDs in a
  way
  that (in my experience) only men ever are. I was actually stunned to
 find
  out she was indeed a she.
 
   Daniel Case
 
   *As most of us know, username-based gender assumptions cut both ways.
  Users Hersfold and Nancy (see the explanation on his userpage) are both
  men, yet regularly deal with new editors assuming based on their names
  that
  they’re female. And I know they’re not the only ones.
 
 
 
  Hersfold and Nancy aren't the only ones.  I've almost come to assume that
  if a username sounds feminine, it's probably attached to a man. Almost
  every editor I know whose username ends in an a  is male.  And many
  female editors have male sounding usernames.
 
  If Wikipedia has taught me one thing, it is never to assume anything
 about
  the identity of the person on the other side of a username: not age, not
  gender, not orientation, not geographical location, or a million other
  things that we tend to use to categorize people.
 
  Risker/Anne
 

 ___
 Gendergap mailing list
 Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Please remember your words here are publicly viewable

[Katherine Casey]

Hi all,

I'm not a listmod, so this is no sort of an official communication, but I
want to remind everyone that this is a publicly-archived mailing list under
the umbrella of the WMF. This means that what you say here can, and
probably will, be seen by people not involved in the list, including other
Wikipedians, news organizations, and probably sometimes the people who are
being discussed here. Think before you hit send whether what you've said
is something that's appropriate to be saying in the manner you are, or in
any manner at all offwiki. This is a hugely supportive mailing list, and
that's awesome, but it's not the place to badmouth others or recruit
friends to help in a dispute.

-Fluffernutter
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap