Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Aron Manning]

On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 at 14:08, Gnangarra  wrote:

> that doesn't mean we don't try to find alternative ways and improve on  the
> way we deal with issues


Having observed and researched the working of ANI it became apparent to me
that the unstructured nature of the discussions there allows for great
fluctuations in what selection of opinions and interests are represented in
each discussion. As the outcome of discussions is mostly steered by the
number of editors supporting any resolution, it's easy to drown out
individual views, even if that's the closest to the truth. A more
structured format that would limit statements and present them equally -
similar to ArbCom's - would ensure more protection from steering
discussions towards a non-neutral outcome based on popularity.
Previously in the discussions about the User reporting system I've drafted (
ref
)
how a tool that ensures this format would work.
I believe that approach would limit how "dramatic" a dispute can become.

Aron
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[William Chan]

The fact that this problem exists in nearly anywhere is true, from biases
to harasses. The problem is whether or not one actively face it, and if
there are any way that is efficient, secure and unbiased way to treat those
problems without undermining the trust mechanism of volunteers.

And all the work should not be bore on the reporter.

Hatred towards other communities is not uncommonly seen, even in Wikipedia
communities, and this is particularly true when it comes to politics. The
problem of harassments, sexual or not, should be treated in a manner where
most editors can observe how it is dealt (e.g. keeping a Standard Operating
Procedure Manual on handling complaints, much like foundation transparency
reports on government requests) but case contents keep secret, and only
members of the community that are legally-recognized by the WMF should be
allowed in dealing with cases like that, and, in particular, a stipend
should be given to their work considering the exhaustive nature.

On Tue, Aug 25, 2020, 20:09 Gnangarra  wrote:

> Yaroslav is right it is difficult to wade through every minor diff to see a
> pattern and AN/I is incapable of reacting to anything but the extremes,
> that doesn't mean we don't try to find alternative ways and improve on  the
> way we deal with issues
>
> On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 at 19:10, Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:
>
> > In addition, (English Wikipedia) ANI can reasonably well deal with one or
> > several highly problematic diffs, but very often we have a long pattern
> > which can result in a long series of diffs, so that each one is
> > unproblematic or slightly problematic, but all together thay may
> constitute
> > a harassment pattern and make the victim feel very unpleasant. ANI is
> > absolutely not capable of dealing with this situation, and usually ArbCom
> > can not handle it either. In my situation, I overreacted a couple of
> times,
> > and then every time I would try to raise the question at best it would be
> > called "keeping old grudges" and I was advised to "grow thick skin", but
> > more often that it was told it was my fault and in fact it was harassment
> > from my side. ArbCom was not capable of performing any better. To be
> > honest, I do not see how T can perform better either. An investigation
> of
> > such situation would require wading through thousands of diffs and
> > reconstructing the whole episodes, and I just do not see how this can be
> > done.
> >
> > Best
> > Yaroslav
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 12:57 PM Gnangarra  wrote:
> >
> > > The whole purpose of harassing someone is to put them under pressure,
> to
> > > make the victim upset and force them away from editing. Creating a
> clear
> > > list
> > > of problematic diffs and an unbiased, unemotional recounting of events
> is
> > > impossible during the incident, when all thats desired is to have the
> > > immediate abuse stopped.  Emotive language is a call for help, seasoned
> > > abusers know how to play the game AN/I and the community knows them so
> > when
> > > they boo the community accepts their version. At AN/I and as Vermont
> > > explain its the victim that has to be restrain their language, its the
> > > victim that  has to be calm, its the victim that has to clearly lay out
> > all
> > > the diffs, its the victim that has to recount/relive the whole of the
> > > abuse.  The victim is not at fault but until the system supports the
> > victim
> > > the problems of in grained abuse and hostility by old hands is going to
> > > remain.
> > >
> > > On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 at 17:51, Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l <
> > > wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I see.
> > > >
> > > > The English Wikipedia, and most projects in general (from my
> > experience),
> > > > are not perfect at handling problems with established editors.
> > > >
> > > > This is to be expected. However, there’s some element of draconian
> > secret
> > > > policing present in having a brigade of T employees handling any
> and
> > > all
> > > > conduct issues. We ha e local communities, and in most cases they are
> > > > successful in handling issues, but when an editor’s social clout is
> > > > involved, and/or when there’s incivility/harassment from multiple
> > > parties,
> > > > it quickly becomes a larger issue that often ends with little to no
> > > action.
> > > >
> > > > With this issue specifically, it’s minor and local community
> functions
> > > > would very likely have been able to manage it properly had the
> > > discussions
> > > > continued. The formation of the messages also help determine the
> > > outcome; a
> > > > message saying they were told to report there with no links but one
> to
> > > the
> > > > editor’s userpage is not very helpful for people viewing it. A list
> of
> > > > problematic diffs and an unbiased, unemotional recounting of events
> is
> > > > quite helpful for those viewing it. The latter is much likely to
> result
> > > > successfully than the former.
> > > >
> > > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Gnangarra]

Yaroslav is right it is difficult to wade through every minor diff to see a
pattern and AN/I is incapable of reacting to anything but the extremes,
that doesn't mean we don't try to find alternative ways and improve on  the
way we deal with issues

On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 at 19:10, Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:

> In addition, (English Wikipedia) ANI can reasonably well deal with one or
> several highly problematic diffs, but very often we have a long pattern
> which can result in a long series of diffs, so that each one is
> unproblematic or slightly problematic, but all together thay may constitute
> a harassment pattern and make the victim feel very unpleasant. ANI is
> absolutely not capable of dealing with this situation, and usually ArbCom
> can not handle it either. In my situation, I overreacted a couple of times,
> and then every time I would try to raise the question at best it would be
> called "keeping old grudges" and I was advised to "grow thick skin", but
> more often that it was told it was my fault and in fact it was harassment
> from my side. ArbCom was not capable of performing any better. To be
> honest, I do not see how T can perform better either. An investigation of
> such situation would require wading through thousands of diffs and
> reconstructing the whole episodes, and I just do not see how this can be
> done.
>
> Best
> Yaroslav
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 12:57 PM Gnangarra  wrote:
>
> > The whole purpose of harassing someone is to put them under pressure, to
> > make the victim upset and force them away from editing. Creating a clear
> > list
> > of problematic diffs and an unbiased, unemotional recounting of events is
> > impossible during the incident, when all thats desired is to have the
> > immediate abuse stopped.  Emotive language is a call for help, seasoned
> > abusers know how to play the game AN/I and the community knows them so
> when
> > they boo the community accepts their version. At AN/I and as Vermont
> > explain its the victim that has to be restrain their language, its the
> > victim that  has to be calm, its the victim that has to clearly lay out
> all
> > the diffs, its the victim that has to recount/relive the whole of the
> > abuse.  The victim is not at fault but until the system supports the
> victim
> > the problems of in grained abuse and hostility by old hands is going to
> > remain.
> >
> > On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 at 17:51, Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l <
> > wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I see.
> > >
> > > The English Wikipedia, and most projects in general (from my
> experience),
> > > are not perfect at handling problems with established editors.
> > >
> > > This is to be expected. However, there’s some element of draconian
> secret
> > > policing present in having a brigade of T employees handling any and
> > all
> > > conduct issues. We ha e local communities, and in most cases they are
> > > successful in handling issues, but when an editor’s social clout is
> > > involved, and/or when there’s incivility/harassment from multiple
> > parties,
> > > it quickly becomes a larger issue that often ends with little to no
> > action.
> > >
> > > With this issue specifically, it’s minor and local community functions
> > > would very likely have been able to manage it properly had the
> > discussions
> > > continued. The formation of the messages also help determine the
> > outcome; a
> > > message saying they were told to report there with no links but one to
> > the
> > > editor’s userpage is not very helpful for people viewing it. A list of
> > > problematic diffs and an unbiased, unemotional recounting of events is
> > > quite helpful for those viewing it. The latter is much likely to result
> > > successfully than the former.
> > >
> > > Also, T actions are not quick and easy either. Their investigations
> are
> > > usually quite extensive and take equally extensive periods of time.
> > > Communities act quicker, and though the volunteers may be affected more
> > by
> > > personal prejudice than employees of the WMF, we are a collaborative
> > > project that relies on community input.
> > >
> > > Hopefully the UCoC is successful with setting reasonable definitions
> and
> > > expectations for community enforcement of conduct policies, though in
> my
> > > view larger projects are not the most pressing issue to be addressed by
> > the
> > > UCoC. This instance of sexual harassment is minor when viewed in
> > > perspective. It’s clearly uncivil and a problem, and we don’t know how
> > the
> > > ANI section would have ended up if continued (though I would have
> > supported
> > > a strong warning and block if it continued, perhaps an IBAN), but it
> > could
> > > have been handled locally. Take a look at most projects with under 30
> > > admins. Small community, usually tightly knit, with entrenched
> > hierarchies
> > > of social clout. Those projects are where extreme incivility, blatant
> > > bigotry, and clearly biased administrative 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Yaroslav Blanter]

In addition, (English Wikipedia) ANI can reasonably well deal with one or
several highly problematic diffs, but very often we have a long pattern
which can result in a long series of diffs, so that each one is
unproblematic or slightly problematic, but all together thay may constitute
a harassment pattern and make the victim feel very unpleasant. ANI is
absolutely not capable of dealing with this situation, and usually ArbCom
can not handle it either. In my situation, I overreacted a couple of times,
and then every time I would try to raise the question at best it would be
called "keeping old grudges" and I was advised to "grow thick skin", but
more often that it was told it was my fault and in fact it was harassment
from my side. ArbCom was not capable of performing any better. To be
honest, I do not see how T can perform better either. An investigation of
such situation would require wading through thousands of diffs and
reconstructing the whole episodes, and I just do not see how this can be
done.

Best
Yaroslav

On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 12:57 PM Gnangarra  wrote:

> The whole purpose of harassing someone is to put them under pressure, to
> make the victim upset and force them away from editing. Creating a clear
> list
> of problematic diffs and an unbiased, unemotional recounting of events is
> impossible during the incident, when all thats desired is to have the
> immediate abuse stopped.  Emotive language is a call for help, seasoned
> abusers know how to play the game AN/I and the community knows them so when
> they boo the community accepts their version. At AN/I and as Vermont
> explain its the victim that has to be restrain their language, its the
> victim that  has to be calm, its the victim that has to clearly lay out all
> the diffs, its the victim that has to recount/relive the whole of the
> abuse.  The victim is not at fault but until the system supports the victim
> the problems of in grained abuse and hostility by old hands is going to
> remain.
>
> On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 at 17:51, Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> > I see.
> >
> > The English Wikipedia, and most projects in general (from my experience),
> > are not perfect at handling problems with established editors.
> >
> > This is to be expected. However, there’s some element of draconian secret
> > policing present in having a brigade of T employees handling any and
> all
> > conduct issues. We ha e local communities, and in most cases they are
> > successful in handling issues, but when an editor’s social clout is
> > involved, and/or when there’s incivility/harassment from multiple
> parties,
> > it quickly becomes a larger issue that often ends with little to no
> action.
> >
> > With this issue specifically, it’s minor and local community functions
> > would very likely have been able to manage it properly had the
> discussions
> > continued. The formation of the messages also help determine the
> outcome; a
> > message saying they were told to report there with no links but one to
> the
> > editor’s userpage is not very helpful for people viewing it. A list of
> > problematic diffs and an unbiased, unemotional recounting of events is
> > quite helpful for those viewing it. The latter is much likely to result
> > successfully than the former.
> >
> > Also, T actions are not quick and easy either. Their investigations are
> > usually quite extensive and take equally extensive periods of time.
> > Communities act quicker, and though the volunteers may be affected more
> by
> > personal prejudice than employees of the WMF, we are a collaborative
> > project that relies on community input.
> >
> > Hopefully the UCoC is successful with setting reasonable definitions and
> > expectations for community enforcement of conduct policies, though in my
> > view larger projects are not the most pressing issue to be addressed by
> the
> > UCoC. This instance of sexual harassment is minor when viewed in
> > perspective. It’s clearly uncivil and a problem, and we don’t know how
> the
> > ANI section would have ended up if continued (though I would have
> supported
> > a strong warning and block if it continued, perhaps an IBAN), but it
> could
> > have been handled locally. Take a look at most projects with under 30
> > admins. Small community, usually tightly knit, with entrenched
> hierarchies
> > of social clout. Those projects are where extreme incivility, blatant
> > bigotry, and clearly biased administrative actions occur most often. Not
> to
> > mention non-harassment/incivility issues like copyright violations,
> > backwards policies, and historical revisionism, completely ignored by
> local
> > administrators, which hopefully at some point can be mitigated as well.
> >
> > Regarding Fæ’s email, it would be interesting and useful to see a study
> on
> > boomerangs at ANI. It does seem prevalent for newer editors, experiencing
> > biting from more established editors, to be unable to seek 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Gnangarra]

The whole purpose of harassing someone is to put them under pressure, to
make the victim upset and force them away from editing. Creating a clear  list
of problematic diffs and an unbiased, unemotional recounting of events is
impossible during the incident, when all thats desired is to have the
immediate abuse stopped.  Emotive language is a call for help, seasoned
abusers know how to play the game AN/I and the community knows them so when
they boo the community accepts their version. At AN/I and as Vermont
explain its the victim that has to be restrain their language, its the
victim that  has to be calm, its the victim that has to clearly lay out all
the diffs, its the victim that has to recount/relive the whole of the
abuse.  The victim is not at fault but until the system supports the victim
the problems of in grained abuse and hostility by old hands is going to
remain.

On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 at 17:51, Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:

> I see.
>
> The English Wikipedia, and most projects in general (from my experience),
> are not perfect at handling problems with established editors.
>
> This is to be expected. However, there’s some element of draconian secret
> policing present in having a brigade of T employees handling any and all
> conduct issues. We ha e local communities, and in most cases they are
> successful in handling issues, but when an editor’s social clout is
> involved, and/or when there’s incivility/harassment from multiple parties,
> it quickly becomes a larger issue that often ends with little to no action.
>
> With this issue specifically, it’s minor and local community functions
> would very likely have been able to manage it properly had the discussions
> continued. The formation of the messages also help determine the outcome; a
> message saying they were told to report there with no links but one to the
> editor’s userpage is not very helpful for people viewing it. A list of
> problematic diffs and an unbiased, unemotional recounting of events is
> quite helpful for those viewing it. The latter is much likely to result
> successfully than the former.
>
> Also, T actions are not quick and easy either. Their investigations are
> usually quite extensive and take equally extensive periods of time.
> Communities act quicker, and though the volunteers may be affected more by
> personal prejudice than employees of the WMF, we are a collaborative
> project that relies on community input.
>
> Hopefully the UCoC is successful with setting reasonable definitions and
> expectations for community enforcement of conduct policies, though in my
> view larger projects are not the most pressing issue to be addressed by the
> UCoC. This instance of sexual harassment is minor when viewed in
> perspective. It’s clearly uncivil and a problem, and we don’t know how the
> ANI section would have ended up if continued (though I would have supported
> a strong warning and block if it continued, perhaps an IBAN), but it could
> have been handled locally. Take a look at most projects with under 30
> admins. Small community, usually tightly knit, with entrenched hierarchies
> of social clout. Those projects are where extreme incivility, blatant
> bigotry, and clearly biased administrative actions occur most often. Not to
> mention non-harassment/incivility issues like copyright violations,
> backwards policies, and historical revisionism, completely ignored by local
> administrators, which hopefully at some point can be mitigated as well.
>
> Regarding Fæ’s email, it would be interesting and useful to see a study on
> boomerangs at ANI. It does seem prevalent for newer editors, experiencing
> biting from more established editors, to be unable to seek rectification
> for the more established editor’s conduct. It is unfortunately also common
> that, when incivility exists, some of it is present on both sides, making
> these issues much less clear-cut and dramatically increasing the
> potentiality for a boomerang.
>
> Best,
> Vermont
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 15:40 William Chan  wrote:
>
> > Why the harassed normally email T but not seeking local help:
> >
> >
> > Sometimes some kinds of harassment against a person or a group is an
> > orchestrated attempt driven by off-wiki matters. Considering the
> > "importance" of Wikipedia and it's sister projects, and the fundamentally
> > huge size of the movement, it seemed mostly unnoticeable in some cases.
> >
> > These kinds of planned harassment (not only sexual harassment but all
> forms
> > of harassment) would not normally be observed in large languages used by
> > different nations because the sheer size of the user base diluted their
> > attempts.
> >
> > However, if language becomes national and got very limited outside use
> > apart from the country they are from (i.e. Japanese in Japan, or Korean
> in
> > Korea,etc. Not saying they have a serious sexual harassment problem, just
> > an example), harassment against the 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l]

I see.

The English Wikipedia, and most projects in general (from my experience),
are not perfect at handling problems with established editors.

This is to be expected. However, there’s some element of draconian secret
policing present in having a brigade of T employees handling any and all
conduct issues. We ha e local communities, and in most cases they are
successful in handling issues, but when an editor’s social clout is
involved, and/or when there’s incivility/harassment from multiple parties,
it quickly becomes a larger issue that often ends with little to no action.

With this issue specifically, it’s minor and local community functions
would very likely have been able to manage it properly had the discussions
continued. The formation of the messages also help determine the outcome; a
message saying they were told to report there with no links but one to the
editor’s userpage is not very helpful for people viewing it. A list of
problematic diffs and an unbiased, unemotional recounting of events is
quite helpful for those viewing it. The latter is much likely to result
successfully than the former.

Also, T actions are not quick and easy either. Their investigations are
usually quite extensive and take equally extensive periods of time.
Communities act quicker, and though the volunteers may be affected more by
personal prejudice than employees of the WMF, we are a collaborative
project that relies on community input.

Hopefully the UCoC is successful with setting reasonable definitions and
expectations for community enforcement of conduct policies, though in my
view larger projects are not the most pressing issue to be addressed by the
UCoC. This instance of sexual harassment is minor when viewed in
perspective. It’s clearly uncivil and a problem, and we don’t know how the
ANI section would have ended up if continued (though I would have supported
a strong warning and block if it continued, perhaps an IBAN), but it could
have been handled locally. Take a look at most projects with under 30
admins. Small community, usually tightly knit, with entrenched hierarchies
of social clout. Those projects are where extreme incivility, blatant
bigotry, and clearly biased administrative actions occur most often. Not to
mention non-harassment/incivility issues like copyright violations,
backwards policies, and historical revisionism, completely ignored by local
administrators, which hopefully at some point can be mitigated as well.

Regarding Fæ’s email, it would be interesting and useful to see a study on
boomerangs at ANI. It does seem prevalent for newer editors, experiencing
biting from more established editors, to be unable to seek rectification
for the more established editor’s conduct. It is unfortunately also common
that, when incivility exists, some of it is present on both sides, making
these issues much less clear-cut and dramatically increasing the
potentiality for a boomerang.

Best,
Vermont



On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 15:40 William Chan  wrote:

> Why the harassed normally email T but not seeking local help:
>
>
> Sometimes some kinds of harassment against a person or a group is an
> orchestrated attempt driven by off-wiki matters. Considering the
> "importance" of Wikipedia and it's sister projects, and the fundamentally
> huge size of the movement, it seemed mostly unnoticeable in some cases.
>
> These kinds of planned harassment (not only sexual harassment but all forms
> of harassment) would not normally be observed in large languages used by
> different nations because the sheer size of the user base diluted their
> attempts.
>
> However, if language becomes national and got very limited outside use
> apart from the country they are from (i.e. Japanese in Japan, or Korean in
> Korea,etc. Not saying they have a serious sexual harassment problem, just
> an example), harassment against the minority may appear in all forms,
> including but not limited to blocking them from any administrative posts,
> to sexual harassments to an outright ban of some individuals. In this case,
> local bodies which deal with harassing would be normally held by those who
> are, or show sympathy to the harasser, and that is the problem.
>
> Local governance (last stand) bodies are usually opaque in nature - the
> elections to those bodies are normally fair, but it is not transparent
> enough of what they do just because they are volunteer.
>
> Those very large communities normally have a (relatively) inefficient speed
> to deal with issues because of the number of problems they receive.
> The irony is that, for the smaller communities is, the abuser would have
> some connection with the last-stand bodies, that would mean conflict of
> interest - though with much irony, COI is not observed when they are
> playing Wikipolitics.
>
> This means, you either get a local "slow safe soace" because they receive
> too many case to review per day, or an "unsafe safe space" because
> harassers know those who deal with these 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[William Chan]

Why the harassed normally email T but not seeking local help:


Sometimes some kinds of harassment against a person or a group is an
orchestrated attempt driven by off-wiki matters. Considering the
"importance" of Wikipedia and it's sister projects, and the fundamentally
huge size of the movement, it seemed mostly unnoticeable in some cases.

These kinds of planned harassment (not only sexual harassment but all forms
of harassment) would not normally be observed in large languages used by
different nations because the sheer size of the user base diluted their
attempts.

However, if language becomes national and got very limited outside use
apart from the country they are from (i.e. Japanese in Japan, or Korean in
Korea,etc. Not saying they have a serious sexual harassment problem, just
an example), harassment against the minority may appear in all forms,
including but not limited to blocking them from any administrative posts,
to sexual harassments to an outright ban of some individuals. In this case,
local bodies which deal with harassing would be normally held by those who
are, or show sympathy to the harasser, and that is the problem.

Local governance (last stand) bodies are usually opaque in nature - the
elections to those bodies are normally fair, but it is not transparent
enough of what they do just because they are volunteer.

Those very large communities normally have a (relatively) inefficient speed
to deal with issues because of the number of problems they receive.
The irony is that, for the smaller communities is, the abuser would have
some connection with the last-stand bodies, that would mean conflict of
interest - though with much irony, COI is not observed when they are
playing Wikipolitics.

This means, you either get a local "slow safe soace" because they receive
too many case to review per day, or an "unsafe safe space" because
harassers know those who deal with these reports.


You either get a language that is too big and inefficient to treat reports,
or languages that, because of the size, they harasser may just outright
know the ones who deal with these problems. That's why T needs way more
people.

And not all languages have self-governing bodies.



P.S. Written by someone who had emailed T about harassments against
himself. One harasser got a conduct warning while the other one got
foundation-blocked.

On Mon, Aug 24, 2020, 22:54 Gnangarra  wrote:

>  For a person to report harassment they must first feel safe to do so.  Not
> everyone is capable of dealing with or participating in a public debate
> about whether they have been harassed, there is a significant difference
> between arguing facts on a topic and dealing with harassment and offensive
> comments directed at you.  Its a very effective method of ensuring that you
> can keep control of subject areas, or part of Wikipedia.  What is going
> unnoticed, unrecorded and never dealt with is the same people make personal
> attacks and harass contributors repeatedly, many of these people are
> protected by other at AN/I or large followings that ensure they are almost
> untouchable.
>
> Just like this thread dismissing problems when they are raised is
> unhelpful, and has a chilling effect on productive outcomes.   The lack of
> alternative safe ways to address issues has been a problem for many years
> driving away 1,000s of good contributors.
>
> On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 21:47, Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> > I fail to understand how requiring public report of publicly-occurring
> > harassment is a problem.
> >
> > If people are being harassed constantly via off-wiki communication,
> > emailing a local admin team or T is definitely the best thing to do if
> > they don’t want to make it public in an on-wiki report.
> >
> > However, if it’s on-wiki, I don’t see any viable reason as to why it
> should
> > not be reported on-wiki as well. By no means is it “doubling down” on
> > harassment; that doesn’t even make much sense considering that it isn’t
> the
> > collective community making the harassment, it’s an individual. It also
> > doesn’t matter at all what the harasser feels like either; if they’re
> > blocked after a civilly-written and clear-cut report on ANI it doesn’t
> > matter what they think. It’s not acceptable to have a secret police team
> to
> > handle every content issue; community input exists for a reason,
> especially
> > on collaborative projects like this.
> >
> > Further, when did anyone say the community is not willing to handle
> > harassment issues? It truly bothers me to see people write nonsense like
> > this.
> >
> > I will restate:
> >
> > Local communities appoint administrators to enforce consensus. There is
> > consensus that harassment should be responded to with warnings and, if
> > repeated or severe, blocks.
> >
> > These administrators usually have a mailing list and an on-wiki
> > noticeboard. These noticeboards are open for anyone to create sections
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Fæ]

On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 14:47, Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l
 wrote:
>
> I fail to understand how requiring public report of publicly-occurring
> harassment is a problem.

"Don't be a cunt"
"Fuck off"
"Stop being hysterical"
+ Far worse actually gets tolerated, and I'm not quoting any here, you
work out why

Anyone feeling they are targeted or harassed with unpleasant personal
comments, especially newer editors, would be INCREDIBLY STUPID to
attempt to complain about it on Wikipedia's ANI. It will boomerang,
and the history of that noticeboard shows that the complainant is
likely to be treated as a troublemaker by the admin corps, with a high
probability of reasons being found to sanction the troublemaker if
they try to answer questions in public.

There's plenty of "unfriendly space" to create a hostile environment
without crossing the boundaries of "free speech" tolerated for long
term contributors, but not newcomers.

My good advice to newer editors is always to discuss bad faith and
nasty aggressive behaviour off-wiki, as it's just not safe to do so
on-wiki, unless you are anonymous and happy to throw away your
account. These behaviours are normal, expected, and even championed
from the top as refreshing expressions of libertarianism.[1]

1. "utter fucking bullshit"
https://www.theregister.com/2016/01/27/trust_me_pleads_wikipedia_former_google_man

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Gnangarra]

 For a person to report harassment they must first feel safe to do so.  Not
everyone is capable of dealing with or participating in a public debate
about whether they have been harassed, there is a significant difference
between arguing facts on a topic and dealing with harassment and offensive
comments directed at you.  Its a very effective method of ensuring that you
can keep control of subject areas, or part of Wikipedia.  What is going
unnoticed, unrecorded and never dealt with is the same people make personal
attacks and harass contributors repeatedly, many of these people are
protected by other at AN/I or large followings that ensure they are almost
untouchable.

Just like this thread dismissing problems when they are raised is
unhelpful, and has a chilling effect on productive outcomes.   The lack of
alternative safe ways to address issues has been a problem for many years
driving away 1,000s of good contributors.

On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 21:47, Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:

> I fail to understand how requiring public report of publicly-occurring
> harassment is a problem.
>
> If people are being harassed constantly via off-wiki communication,
> emailing a local admin team or T is definitely the best thing to do if
> they don’t want to make it public in an on-wiki report.
>
> However, if it’s on-wiki, I don’t see any viable reason as to why it should
> not be reported on-wiki as well. By no means is it “doubling down” on
> harassment; that doesn’t even make much sense considering that it isn’t the
> collective community making the harassment, it’s an individual. It also
> doesn’t matter at all what the harasser feels like either; if they’re
> blocked after a civilly-written and clear-cut report on ANI it doesn’t
> matter what they think. It’s not acceptable to have a secret police team to
> handle every content issue; community input exists for a reason, especially
> on collaborative projects like this.
>
> Further, when did anyone say the community is not willing to handle
> harassment issues? It truly bothers me to see people write nonsense like
> this.
>
> I will restate:
>
> Local communities appoint administrators to enforce consensus. There is
> consensus that harassment should be responded to with warnings and, if
> repeated or severe, blocks.
>
> These administrators usually have a mailing list and an on-wiki
> noticeboard. These noticeboards are open for anyone to create sections on,
> and unless a request was clearly made in bad faith or intentionally misled
> readers, there is practically no chance of successful retaliatory action on
> the part of the individual who created the harassment.
>
> In this case, a section was made on ANI, multiple editors commented, and
> for some reason the section was removed mid-discussion. It is to be
> expected that someone with an independent viewpoint would seek less radical
> action than someone directly a party of the dispute. In this case, there
> was incivility and arguable harassment coming from both parties, though
> clearly “cutie” is not conducive to the desired contributory environment.
>
> Simple conduct cases are not the sort of issue for T Let them (and often
> stewards) handle the threats to life, the vandals trying to find where
> editors live, the IPs making terrorist threats, the new accounts uploading
> child pornography, the vandals spreading the private details of editors,
> etc. Basic conduct issues can be handled by local administrators.
>
> And for the “chilling effect” of reporting issues like this publicly, if
> someone is incapable of seeing other people interpret events another way,
> disagreeing with them, or not wanting as drastic and immediate action, they
> may not be suited for a collaborative project.
>
> There are easy ways to handle people who are clearly harassing you on-wiki:
> 1) Ask them to stop. If they refuse,
> 2) Create a section on ANI giving a short, simple, and unbiased explanation
> of the issue with diffs.
> 3) Wait for editors and admins to comment. If the community believes it’s
> problematic enough to warrant action, action will be taken. If no and the
> harassment continues continues,
> 4) Most projects have other methods of handling issues like this. Enwiki
> has ArbCom for this, simplewiki has community sanction discussions, other
> projects have other methods.
>
> At no point would removing the ANI report mid-discussion be helpful. And
> doing so then claiming that it’s the community’s fault is clearly
> incorrect.
>
> Regards,
> Vermont
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 01:46 Gnangarra  wrote:
>
> > >
> > > The code of conduct is not a law. People who are harassers are
> criminals
> > > and not above the law. Sexual harassment is a serious offense. Any kind
> > > of harrasment is an offense. Wikipedia s administrators are not the law
> > > and not above the law.
> >
> > Wikipedia is not above the law.
> >
> >
> > The international aspects and the fact that WMF 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l]

I fail to understand how requiring public report of publicly-occurring
harassment is a problem.

If people are being harassed constantly via off-wiki communication,
emailing a local admin team or T is definitely the best thing to do if
they don’t want to make it public in an on-wiki report.

However, if it’s on-wiki, I don’t see any viable reason as to why it should
not be reported on-wiki as well. By no means is it “doubling down” on
harassment; that doesn’t even make much sense considering that it isn’t the
collective community making the harassment, it’s an individual. It also
doesn’t matter at all what the harasser feels like either; if they’re
blocked after a civilly-written and clear-cut report on ANI it doesn’t
matter what they think. It’s not acceptable to have a secret police team to
handle every content issue; community input exists for a reason, especially
on collaborative projects like this.

Further, when did anyone say the community is not willing to handle
harassment issues? It truly bothers me to see people write nonsense like
this.

I will restate:

Local communities appoint administrators to enforce consensus. There is
consensus that harassment should be responded to with warnings and, if
repeated or severe, blocks.

These administrators usually have a mailing list and an on-wiki
noticeboard. These noticeboards are open for anyone to create sections on,
and unless a request was clearly made in bad faith or intentionally misled
readers, there is practically no chance of successful retaliatory action on
the part of the individual who created the harassment.

In this case, a section was made on ANI, multiple editors commented, and
for some reason the section was removed mid-discussion. It is to be
expected that someone with an independent viewpoint would seek less radical
action than someone directly a party of the dispute. In this case, there
was incivility and arguable harassment coming from both parties, though
clearly “cutie” is not conducive to the desired contributory environment.

Simple conduct cases are not the sort of issue for T Let them (and often
stewards) handle the threats to life, the vandals trying to find where
editors live, the IPs making terrorist threats, the new accounts uploading
child pornography, the vandals spreading the private details of editors,
etc. Basic conduct issues can be handled by local administrators.

And for the “chilling effect” of reporting issues like this publicly, if
someone is incapable of seeing other people interpret events another way,
disagreeing with them, or not wanting as drastic and immediate action, they
may not be suited for a collaborative project.

There are easy ways to handle people who are clearly harassing you on-wiki:
1) Ask them to stop. If they refuse,
2) Create a section on ANI giving a short, simple, and unbiased explanation
of the issue with diffs.
3) Wait for editors and admins to comment. If the community believes it’s
problematic enough to warrant action, action will be taken. If no and the
harassment continues continues,
4) Most projects have other methods of handling issues like this. Enwiki
has ArbCom for this, simplewiki has community sanction discussions, other
projects have other methods.

At no point would removing the ANI report mid-discussion be helpful. And
doing so then claiming that it’s the community’s fault is clearly
incorrect.

Regards,
Vermont



On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 01:46 Gnangarra  wrote:

> >
> > The code of conduct is not a law. People who are harassers are criminals
> > and not above the law. Sexual harassment is a serious offense. Any kind
> > of harrasment is an offense. Wikipedia s administrators are not the law
> > and not above the law.
>
> Wikipedia is not above the law.
>
>
> The international aspects and the fact that WMF protects editors privacy
> makes options outside the movement very limited to only the extreme end of
> the scale. Beside the legal aspect its a cop out for the Community & WMF to
> dismiss any harassment as something they cant do anything about, this
> response is why AN/I is also a waste of time and why so much harassment
> never gets dealt with, ultimately why the movement has difficulty in
> attracting under represented groups
>
> On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 13:14, Ανώνυμος Βικιπαιδιστής <
> anonymuswikiped...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The code of conduct is not a law.
> > People who are harassers are criminals and not above the law.
> > Sexual harassment is a serious offense. Any kind of harrasment is an
> > offense. Wikipedia s administrators are not the law and not above the
> law.
> > Wikipedia is not above the law.
> > People who seek help should be appointed to the right specialized
> > authorities as the police and not discouraged to do so.
> >
> > Safety team from my experience, will not help any wikipedian/victim who
> > with report a harrasment case. They are just another department of
> > wikimedia foundation.
> >
> > Any people is important and count.
> > Please 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Gnangarra]

>
> The code of conduct is not a law. People who are harassers are criminals
> and not above the law. Sexual harassment is a serious offense. Any kind
> of harrasment is an offense. Wikipedia s administrators are not the law
> and not above the law.

Wikipedia is not above the law.


The international aspects and the fact that WMF protects editors privacy
makes options outside the movement very limited to only the extreme end of
the scale. Beside the legal aspect its a cop out for the Community & WMF to
dismiss any harassment as something they cant do anything about, this
response is why AN/I is also a waste of time and why so much harassment
never gets dealt with, ultimately why the movement has difficulty in
attracting under represented groups

On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 13:14, Ανώνυμος Βικιπαιδιστής <
anonymuswikiped...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The code of conduct is not a law.
> People who are harassers are criminals and not above the law.
> Sexual harassment is a serious offense. Any kind of harrasment is an
> offense. Wikipedia s administrators are not the law and not above the law.
> Wikipedia is not above the law.
> People who seek help should be appointed to the right specialized
> authorities as the police and not discouraged to do so.
>
> Safety team from my experience, will not help any wikipedian/victim who
> with report a harrasment case. They are just another department of
> wikimedia foundation.
>
> Any people is important and count.
> Please take what ever actions you think is necessary.
>
> I believe you.
>
> Ανώνυμος Βικιπαιδιστής
>
>
> Στις Δευ, 24 Αυγ 2020, 7:39 π.μ. ο χρήστης Robert Myers <
> robert.my...@wikimedia.org.au> έγραψε:
>
> > And there the problem lies, going to local authorities (police) isn’t
> > going to be useful. Some authorities require the alleged crime to be
> > committed in their jurisdiction, which can be limited, anonymous nature
> of
> > the person who committed the alleged crime makes it difficult to identify
> > the individual(s), with it servers hosted outside the jurisdiction make
> it
> > harder to investigate. Also I have seen in the past, WP:LEGAL used
> against
> > those who have reported threats of physical violence or harassment
> > (physical stalking) to law enforcement.
> >
> > I do think there needs to be a off-wiki complaint process for serious
> > allegations, since on-wiki processes can be inappropriate and acts as a
> > chilling effect (since it is very open and public) on the victim(s). The
> > same situation can occur for alleged perpetrator(s), where the
> > allegation(s) are false or vexatious and malicious grievances.
> >
> > Maybe the Universal Code of Conduct might address this issue, it might
> not
> > as well.
> >
> > --
> > Robert Myers
> > robert.my...@wikimedia.org.au
> > http://www.wikimedia.org.au
> >
> > > On 24 Aug 2020, at 1:37 pm, Ανώνυμος Βικιπαιδιστής <
> > anonymuswikiped...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > If you ve been sexually harassed in wikipedia this is not a matter to
> be
> > > solved on a mailing list or by Safety team. Go to you local authorities
> > and
> > > report it. This is a very serious matter to just become an essay for
> > > someone or belive that it can be solved by administrators or safety
> team.
> > > Safety team in my harassment case told me to "politely" ask my
> harrasers
> > to
> > > stop harassing me. Please don t relay on them for such a serious
> matter!
> > > Please be safe and I m sure you can seek help by trained and serious
> > people
> > > by your local authorities.
> > > I wish someone could told me that in my case then and not point me to
> > > safety team. They will not help you.
> > >
> > > Ανώνυμος Βικιπαιδιστής
> > >
> > >
> > > Στις Δευ, 24 Αυγ 2020, 3:41 π.μ. ο χρήστης Gnangarra <
> > gnanga...@gmail.com>
> > > έγραψε:
> > >
> > >> If someone feels harassed then a public noticeboard is the last place
> to
> > >> send them for help,  that is an absolute failure of the community to
> > >> understand that the act of reporting is also doubling down on the
> harm.
> > >> Doing so publicly is indicating to the person committing the
> harassment
> > >> that they have succeeded in causing harm.
> > >>
> > >> This folks is the very reason why we fail to retain editors and breach
> > the
> > >> imbalance of editors and continue have trouble with bias.  Everyone
> > speaks
> > >> english but the cultural nuances of the language vary greatly with
> words
> > >> having multiple meanings and being used specifically to cause offense.
> > >>
> > >> The word cutie has its meanings;
> > >>
> > >>   -  of being nice looking when talking about kids and animals
> > >>
> > >> but once its used referring to an adult as part of a discussion its
> > changes
> > >> to that of them being;
> > >>
> > >>   - of being an arsehole
> > >>   - of being picky
> > >>   - and of having sexual connotations ranging from you are fuckable,
> to
> > >>   your sexual orientation.
> > >>
> > >> When these complaints get to something 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Ανώνυμος Βικιπαιδιστής]

The code of conduct is not a law.
People who are harassers are criminals and not above the law.
Sexual harassment is a serious offense. Any kind of harrasment is an
offense. Wikipedia s administrators are not the law and not above the law.
Wikipedia is not above the law.
People who seek help should be appointed to the right specialized
authorities as the police and not discouraged to do so.

Safety team from my experience, will not help any wikipedian/victim who
with report a harrasment case. They are just another department of
wikimedia foundation.

Any people is important and count.
Please take what ever actions you think is necessary.

I believe you.

Ανώνυμος Βικιπαιδιστής


Στις Δευ, 24 Αυγ 2020, 7:39 π.μ. ο χρήστης Robert Myers <
robert.my...@wikimedia.org.au> έγραψε:

> And there the problem lies, going to local authorities (police) isn’t
> going to be useful. Some authorities require the alleged crime to be
> committed in their jurisdiction, which can be limited, anonymous nature of
> the person who committed the alleged crime makes it difficult to identify
> the individual(s), with it servers hosted outside the jurisdiction make it
> harder to investigate. Also I have seen in the past, WP:LEGAL used against
> those who have reported threats of physical violence or harassment
> (physical stalking) to law enforcement.
>
> I do think there needs to be a off-wiki complaint process for serious
> allegations, since on-wiki processes can be inappropriate and acts as a
> chilling effect (since it is very open and public) on the victim(s). The
> same situation can occur for alleged perpetrator(s), where the
> allegation(s) are false or vexatious and malicious grievances.
>
> Maybe the Universal Code of Conduct might address this issue, it might not
> as well.
>
> --
> Robert Myers
> robert.my...@wikimedia.org.au
> http://www.wikimedia.org.au
>
> > On 24 Aug 2020, at 1:37 pm, Ανώνυμος Βικιπαιδιστής <
> anonymuswikiped...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > If you ve been sexually harassed in wikipedia this is not a matter to be
> > solved on a mailing list or by Safety team. Go to you local authorities
> and
> > report it. This is a very serious matter to just become an essay for
> > someone or belive that it can be solved by administrators or safety team.
> > Safety team in my harassment case told me to "politely" ask my harrasers
> to
> > stop harassing me. Please don t relay on them for such a serious matter!
> > Please be safe and I m sure you can seek help by trained and serious
> people
> > by your local authorities.
> > I wish someone could told me that in my case then and not point me to
> > safety team. They will not help you.
> >
> > Ανώνυμος Βικιπαιδιστής
> >
> >
> > Στις Δευ, 24 Αυγ 2020, 3:41 π.μ. ο χρήστης Gnangarra <
> gnanga...@gmail.com>
> > έγραψε:
> >
> >> If someone feels harassed then a public noticeboard is the last place to
> >> send them for help,  that is an absolute failure of the community to
> >> understand that the act of reporting is also doubling down on the harm.
> >> Doing so publicly is indicating to the person committing the harassment
> >> that they have succeeded in causing harm.
> >>
> >> This folks is the very reason why we fail to retain editors and breach
> the
> >> imbalance of editors and continue have trouble with bias.  Everyone
> speaks
> >> english but the cultural nuances of the language vary greatly with words
> >> having multiple meanings and being used specifically to cause offense.
> >>
> >> The word cutie has its meanings;
> >>
> >>   -  of being nice looking when talking about kids and animals
> >>
> >> but once its used referring to an adult as part of a discussion its
> changes
> >> to that of them being;
> >>
> >>   - of being an arsehole
> >>   - of being picky
> >>   - and of having sexual connotations ranging from you are fuckable, to
> >>   your sexual orientation.
> >>
> >> When these complaints get to something like AN/I those cultural and
> >> linguistic nuances get dismissed and the person using them has gained a
> lot
> >> of power, self satisfaction, and endorsement of their harassment as
> being
> >> ok, with a bonus that other users are now also enabled to harass the
> >> complaining editor knowing full well that AN/I will do nothing.
> >>
> >> The bottom line is if a person feels harassed they have been harassed,
> >> whether we understand the depth of why they feel harassed is not
> relevant
> >> but that should not be a barrier to prevent further harassment.
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 06:21, Isaac Olatunde  >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hello Chris,
> >>>
> >>> This isn't a terribly bad advise, AFAICS.
> >>>
> >>> Harassments are treated on a case-by-case basis.
> >>>
> >>> So, if this is something you aren't comfortable discussing publicly,
> you
> >>> could email the Functionary team or ArbCom or similar body in that
> >>> community.
> >>>
> >>> If it's something that should be removed from public view, you could
> >>> contact the 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Robert Myers]

And there the problem lies, going to local authorities (police) isn’t going to 
be useful. Some authorities require the alleged crime to be committed in their 
jurisdiction, which can be limited, anonymous nature of the person who 
committed the alleged crime makes it difficult to identify the individual(s), 
with it servers hosted outside the jurisdiction make it harder to investigate. 
Also I have seen in the past, WP:LEGAL used against those who have reported 
threats of physical violence or harassment (physical stalking) to law 
enforcement. 

I do think there needs to be a off-wiki complaint process for serious 
allegations, since on-wiki processes can be inappropriate and acts as a 
chilling effect (since it is very open and public) on the victim(s). The same 
situation can occur for alleged perpetrator(s), where the allegation(s) are 
false or vexatious and malicious grievances. 

Maybe the Universal Code of Conduct might address this issue, it might not as 
well. 

--
Robert Myers
robert.my...@wikimedia.org.au
http://www.wikimedia.org.au

> On 24 Aug 2020, at 1:37 pm, Ανώνυμος Βικιπαιδιστής 
>  wrote:
> 
> If you ve been sexually harassed in wikipedia this is not a matter to be
> solved on a mailing list or by Safety team. Go to you local authorities and
> report it. This is a very serious matter to just become an essay for
> someone or belive that it can be solved by administrators or safety team.
> Safety team in my harassment case told me to "politely" ask my harrasers to
> stop harassing me. Please don t relay on them for such a serious matter!
> Please be safe and I m sure you can seek help by trained and serious people
> by your local authorities.
> I wish someone could told me that in my case then and not point me to
> safety team. They will not help you.
> 
> Ανώνυμος Βικιπαιδιστής
> 
> 
> Στις Δευ, 24 Αυγ 2020, 3:41 π.μ. ο χρήστης Gnangarra 
> έγραψε:
> 
>> If someone feels harassed then a public noticeboard is the last place to
>> send them for help,  that is an absolute failure of the community to
>> understand that the act of reporting is also doubling down on the harm.
>> Doing so publicly is indicating to the person committing the harassment
>> that they have succeeded in causing harm.
>> 
>> This folks is the very reason why we fail to retain editors and breach the
>> imbalance of editors and continue have trouble with bias.  Everyone speaks
>> english but the cultural nuances of the language vary greatly with words
>> having multiple meanings and being used specifically to cause offense.
>> 
>> The word cutie has its meanings;
>> 
>>   -  of being nice looking when talking about kids and animals
>> 
>> but once its used referring to an adult as part of a discussion its changes
>> to that of them being;
>> 
>>   - of being an arsehole
>>   - of being picky
>>   - and of having sexual connotations ranging from you are fuckable, to
>>   your sexual orientation.
>> 
>> When these complaints get to something like AN/I those cultural and
>> linguistic nuances get dismissed and the person using them has gained a lot
>> of power, self satisfaction, and endorsement of their harassment as being
>> ok, with a bonus that other users are now also enabled to harass the
>> complaining editor knowing full well that AN/I will do nothing.
>> 
>> The bottom line is if a person feels harassed they have been harassed,
>> whether we understand the depth of why they feel harassed is not relevant
>> but that should not be a barrier to prevent further harassment.
>> 
>> 
>>> On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 06:21, Isaac Olatunde 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello Chris,
>>> 
>>> This isn't a terribly bad advise, AFAICS.
>>> 
>>> Harassments are treated on a case-by-case basis.
>>> 
>>> So, if this is something you aren't comfortable discussing publicly, you
>>> could email the Functionary team or ArbCom or similar body in that
>>> community.
>>> 
>>> If it's something that should be removed from public view, you could
>>> contact the oversight team.
>>> 
>>> I can't see the contents of the harassment, so I can only speak based on
>>> general principle.
>>> 
>>> Regards
>>> 
>>> Isaac
>>> 
>>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2020, 23:07 Chris Sherlock, 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 To be clear, this is what I was advised:
 
 “ Harassment concerns can be reviewed under the appropriate community
 process. I would therefore advise you to report the edit summary to the
 appropriate channels on the wiki it occured. If this happened on
>> English
 Wikipedia, this would be the Administrator's board for incidents.
 I hope the above is helpful.”
 
 Chris
 
 Sent from my iPhone
 
> On 24 Aug 2020, at 6:43 am, Chris Sherlock <
>> chris.sherloc...@gmail.com
 
 wrote:
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> I have been advised by the WMF that if anyone is concerned about
>> being
 sexually harassed they must report this to AN/I and there are no
>> private
 mechanisms to report this sort of thing.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Ανώνυμος Βικιπαιδιστής]

If you ve been sexually harassed in wikipedia this is not a matter to be
solved on a mailing list or by Safety team. Go to you local authorities and
report it. This is a very serious matter to just become an essay for
someone or belive that it can be solved by administrators or safety team.
Safety team in my harassment case told me to "politely" ask my harrasers to
stop harassing me. Please don t relay on them for such a serious matter!
Please be safe and I m sure you can seek help by trained and serious people
by your local authorities.
I wish someone could told me that in my case then and not point me to
safety team. They will not help you.

Ανώνυμος Βικιπαιδιστής


Στις Δευ, 24 Αυγ 2020, 3:41 π.μ. ο χρήστης Gnangarra 
έγραψε:

> If someone feels harassed then a public noticeboard is the last place to
> send them for help,  that is an absolute failure of the community to
> understand that the act of reporting is also doubling down on the harm.
> Doing so publicly is indicating to the person committing the harassment
> that they have succeeded in causing harm.
>
> This folks is the very reason why we fail to retain editors and breach the
> imbalance of editors and continue have trouble with bias.  Everyone speaks
> english but the cultural nuances of the language vary greatly with words
> having multiple meanings and being used specifically to cause offense.
>
> The word cutie has its meanings;
>
>-  of being nice looking when talking about kids and animals
>
> but once its used referring to an adult as part of a discussion its changes
> to that of them being;
>
>- of being an arsehole
>- of being picky
>- and of having sexual connotations ranging from you are fuckable, to
>your sexual orientation.
>
> When these complaints get to something like AN/I those cultural and
> linguistic nuances get dismissed and the person using them has gained a lot
> of power, self satisfaction, and endorsement of their harassment as being
> ok, with a bonus that other users are now also enabled to harass the
> complaining editor knowing full well that AN/I will do nothing.
>
> The bottom line is if a person feels harassed they have been harassed,
> whether we understand the depth of why they feel harassed is not relevant
> but that should not be a barrier to prevent further harassment.
>
>
> On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 06:21, Isaac Olatunde 
> wrote:
>
> > Hello Chris,
> >
> > This isn't a terribly bad advise, AFAICS.
> >
> > Harassments are treated on a case-by-case basis.
> >
> > So, if this is something you aren't comfortable discussing publicly, you
> > could email the Functionary team or ArbCom or similar body in that
> > community.
> >
> > If it's something that should be removed from public view, you could
> > contact the oversight team.
> >
> > I can't see the contents of the harassment, so I can only speak based on
> > general principle.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Isaac
> >
> > On Sun, 23 Aug 2020, 23:07 Chris Sherlock, 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > To be clear, this is what I was advised:
> > >
> > > “ Harassment concerns can be reviewed under the appropriate community
> > > process. I would therefore advise you to report the edit summary to the
> > > appropriate channels on the wiki it occured. If this happened on
> English
> > > Wikipedia, this would be the Administrator's board for incidents.
> > > I hope the above is helpful.”
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > >
> > > > On 24 Aug 2020, at 6:43 am, Chris Sherlock <
> chris.sherloc...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello all,
> > > >
> > > > I have been advised by the WMF that if anyone is concerned about
> being
> > > sexually harassed they must report this to AN/I and there are no
> private
> > > mechanisms to report this sort of thing.
> > > >
> > > > Is this for real?
> > > >
> > > > Chris Sherlock
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
>
>
> --
> GN.
>
> *Power of Diverse Collaboration*
> *Sharing knowledge brings people together*
> Wikimania Bangkok 2021
> August
> hosted by ESEAP
>
> Wikimania: https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> Noongarpedia: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Gnangarra]

If someone feels harassed then a public noticeboard is the last place to
send them for help,  that is an absolute failure of the community to
understand that the act of reporting is also doubling down on the harm.
Doing so publicly is indicating to the person committing the harassment
that they have succeeded in causing harm.

This folks is the very reason why we fail to retain editors and breach the
imbalance of editors and continue have trouble with bias.  Everyone speaks
english but the cultural nuances of the language vary greatly with words
having multiple meanings and being used specifically to cause offense.

The word cutie has its meanings;

   -  of being nice looking when talking about kids and animals

but once its used referring to an adult as part of a discussion its changes
to that of them being;

   - of being an arsehole
   - of being picky
   - and of having sexual connotations ranging from you are fuckable, to
   your sexual orientation.

When these complaints get to something like AN/I those cultural and
linguistic nuances get dismissed and the person using them has gained a lot
of power, self satisfaction, and endorsement of their harassment as being
ok, with a bonus that other users are now also enabled to harass the
complaining editor knowing full well that AN/I will do nothing.

The bottom line is if a person feels harassed they have been harassed,
whether we understand the depth of why they feel harassed is not relevant
but that should not be a barrier to prevent further harassment.


On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 06:21, Isaac Olatunde 
wrote:

> Hello Chris,
>
> This isn't a terribly bad advise, AFAICS.
>
> Harassments are treated on a case-by-case basis.
>
> So, if this is something you aren't comfortable discussing publicly, you
> could email the Functionary team or ArbCom or similar body in that
> community.
>
> If it's something that should be removed from public view, you could
> contact the oversight team.
>
> I can't see the contents of the harassment, so I can only speak based on
> general principle.
>
> Regards
>
> Isaac
>
> On Sun, 23 Aug 2020, 23:07 Chris Sherlock, 
> wrote:
>
> > To be clear, this is what I was advised:
> >
> > “ Harassment concerns can be reviewed under the appropriate community
> > process. I would therefore advise you to report the edit summary to the
> > appropriate channels on the wiki it occured. If this happened on English
> > Wikipedia, this would be the Administrator's board for incidents.
> > I hope the above is helpful.”
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > > On 24 Aug 2020, at 6:43 am, Chris Sherlock  >
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello all,
> > >
> > > I have been advised by the WMF that if anyone is concerned about being
> > sexually harassed they must report this to AN/I and there are no private
> > mechanisms to report this sort of thing.
> > >
> > > Is this for real?
> > >
> > > Chris Sherlock
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>


-- 
GN.

*Power of Diverse Collaboration*
*Sharing knowledge brings people together*
Wikimania Bangkok 2021
August
hosted by ESEAP

Wikimania: https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page
My print shop: https://www.redbubble.com/people/Gnangarra/shop?asc=u
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Isaac Olatunde]

Hello Chris,

This isn't a terribly bad advise, AFAICS.

Harassments are treated on a case-by-case basis.

So, if this is something you aren't comfortable discussing publicly, you
could email the Functionary team or ArbCom or similar body in that
community.

If it's something that should be removed from public view, you could
contact the oversight team.

I can't see the contents of the harassment, so I can only speak based on
general principle.

Regards

Isaac

On Sun, 23 Aug 2020, 23:07 Chris Sherlock, 
wrote:

> To be clear, this is what I was advised:
>
> “ Harassment concerns can be reviewed under the appropriate community
> process. I would therefore advise you to report the edit summary to the
> appropriate channels on the wiki it occured. If this happened on English
> Wikipedia, this would be the Administrator's board for incidents.
> I hope the above is helpful.”
>
> Chris
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On 24 Aug 2020, at 6:43 am, Chris Sherlock 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I have been advised by the WMF that if anyone is concerned about being
> sexually harassed they must report this to AN/I and there are no private
> mechanisms to report this sort of thing.
> >
> > Is this for real?
> >
> > Chris Sherlock
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Todd Allen]

It depends on the nature of the incident. If the harassment took place on
the wiki, yes, it should be reported via an on-wiki process since it does
not involve private information. On the English Wikipedia, that would
generally be AN/I.

If the harassment happened off-wiki (e.g., via harassing emails), on the
English Wikipedia it may be reported to the Arbitration Committee (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee). Other
projects may have different processes for handling incidents which involve
off-wiki harassment.

Todd

On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 4:11 PM Isaac Olatunde 
wrote:

> Well, I don't know the fact directly but the standard procedure is to
> discuss it with a local administrator on the relevant talk page or notice
> board. So, Vermont is correct.
>
> The T does not usually take action in cases that can generally be handled
> by the local community. Thus, responses such as "falls outside the
> Foundation's remit" isn't bad in such cases.
>
> Regards.
>
> Isaac
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, 23 Aug 2020, 22:51 Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l, <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> > Chris,
> >
> > More generally, conduct issues are handled locally. We do not have a
> > central authority to handle issues like this; local communities are, in
> the
> > vast majority of cases, capable of handling conduct problems of it’s
> > editors. Not to mention that T would be incapable of handling every
> minor
> > conduct problem.
> >
> > It also is not something that is usually emailed to emergency@; if
> there’s
> > extensive problems with harassment, and local functions do not work,
> > c...@wikimedia.org will get you in touch with T who can look into the
> > issue.
> >
> > However, you haven’t tried to handle this locally. Creating an ANI
> section,
> > seeing that people aren’t 100% in agreement with your preferred outcome,
> > and then removing it is not very helpful towards resolving this.
> >
> > From my somewhat limited looking into the events, there’s been some
> > problematic shows of incivility on from both parties, with WWGB using the
> > word “cutie” in an offhand edit summary. It isn’t appropriate, it
> certainly
> > didn’t improve their point, but calling it sexual harassment and hoping
> for
> > the WMF or others to take immediate and dire action without community
> input
> > is misleading and unrealistic. On a collaborative project, problems are
> > handled collaboratively with uninvolved editors looking at the issue
> from a
> > third party perspective, giving their input, and at some point an
> > administrator coming along to enact the consensus. That’s why
> noticeboards
> > of this type exist, which discuss and evaluate conduct issues to seek a
> > resolution. We do not know how other community members and admins would
> > have participated in the discussion because it was cut short.
> >
> > I noticed that you said, on Facebook, that you did not feel safe talking
> to
> > WWGB directly about it, and that you did not feel safe on ANI. I’m very
> > sorry to hear this; though I am not sure what you believe to be unsafe
> > about leaving a talk page message stating your having taken offense at
> > WWGB’s remarks, or asking for input from administrators and the community
> > to resolve the issue, those are the methods of fixing issues. If either
> > action were met with hostility, insult, or further harassment, there
> would
> > be a very clear and simple case for an administrator to take action, and
> > thus would have been much easier. If WWGB, however, apologized and agreed
> > not to continue with such conduct in the future, it would also have been
> > much easier. We don’t have a sort of secret police to handle issues in
> > private. The community processes exist for a reason, and when permitted
> to
> > take place, usually work.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Vermont
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 17:27 Aron Manning 
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, 23 Aug 2020 at 22:43, Chris Sherlock <
> chris.sherloc...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I have been advised by the WMF that if anyone is concerned about
> being
> > > > sexually harassed they must report this to AN/I and there are no
> > private
> > > > mechanisms to report this sort of thing.
> > > >
> > > > Is this for real?
> > >
> > >
> > > Assuming you've contacted Trust, "falls outside of the
> > Foundation's
> > > remit" is a standard answer to receive as a regular editor.
> > >
> > > Bringing the issue to ANI it will most likely be ignored. If your issue
> > is
> > > with a long-term / established editor it has a significant chance to
> > > boomerang .
> > >
> > > Sadly, this is for real and somewhat the reason behind the UCoC
> proposal.
> > > Whether that will change this is another question.
> > >
> > > Aron
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Isaac Olatunde]

Well, I don't know the fact directly but the standard procedure is to
discuss it with a local administrator on the relevant talk page or notice
board. So, Vermont is correct.

The T does not usually take action in cases that can generally be handled
by the local community. Thus, responses such as "falls outside the
Foundation's remit" isn't bad in such cases.

Regards.

Isaac




On Sun, 23 Aug 2020, 22:51 Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l, <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Chris,
>
> More generally, conduct issues are handled locally. We do not have a
> central authority to handle issues like this; local communities are, in the
> vast majority of cases, capable of handling conduct problems of it’s
> editors. Not to mention that T would be incapable of handling every minor
> conduct problem.
>
> It also is not something that is usually emailed to emergency@; if there’s
> extensive problems with harassment, and local functions do not work,
> c...@wikimedia.org will get you in touch with T who can look into the
> issue.
>
> However, you haven’t tried to handle this locally. Creating an ANI section,
> seeing that people aren’t 100% in agreement with your preferred outcome,
> and then removing it is not very helpful towards resolving this.
>
> From my somewhat limited looking into the events, there’s been some
> problematic shows of incivility on from both parties, with WWGB using the
> word “cutie” in an offhand edit summary. It isn’t appropriate, it certainly
> didn’t improve their point, but calling it sexual harassment and hoping for
> the WMF or others to take immediate and dire action without community input
> is misleading and unrealistic. On a collaborative project, problems are
> handled collaboratively with uninvolved editors looking at the issue from a
> third party perspective, giving their input, and at some point an
> administrator coming along to enact the consensus. That’s why noticeboards
> of this type exist, which discuss and evaluate conduct issues to seek a
> resolution. We do not know how other community members and admins would
> have participated in the discussion because it was cut short.
>
> I noticed that you said, on Facebook, that you did not feel safe talking to
> WWGB directly about it, and that you did not feel safe on ANI. I’m very
> sorry to hear this; though I am not sure what you believe to be unsafe
> about leaving a talk page message stating your having taken offense at
> WWGB’s remarks, or asking for input from administrators and the community
> to resolve the issue, those are the methods of fixing issues. If either
> action were met with hostility, insult, or further harassment, there would
> be a very clear and simple case for an administrator to take action, and
> thus would have been much easier. If WWGB, however, apologized and agreed
> not to continue with such conduct in the future, it would also have been
> much easier. We don’t have a sort of secret police to handle issues in
> private. The community processes exist for a reason, and when permitted to
> take place, usually work.
>
> Best regards,
> Vermont
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 17:27 Aron Manning  wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 23 Aug 2020 at 22:43, Chris Sherlock  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I have been advised by the WMF that if anyone is concerned about being
> > > sexually harassed they must report this to AN/I and there are no
> private
> > > mechanisms to report this sort of thing.
> > >
> > > Is this for real?
> >
> >
> > Assuming you've contacted Trust, "falls outside of the
> Foundation's
> > remit" is a standard answer to receive as a regular editor.
> >
> > Bringing the issue to ANI it will most likely be ignored. If your issue
> is
> > with a long-term / established editor it has a significant chance to
> > boomerang .
> >
> > Sadly, this is for real and somewhat the reason behind the UCoC proposal.
> > Whether that will change this is another question.
> >
> > Aron
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Chris Sherlock]

To be clear, this is what I was advised:

“ Harassment concerns can be reviewed under the appropriate community process. 
I would therefore advise you to report the edit summary to the appropriate 
channels on the wiki it occured. If this happened on English Wikipedia, this 
would be the Administrator's board for incidents.
I hope the above is helpful.”

Chris

Sent from my iPhone

> On 24 Aug 2020, at 6:43 am, Chris Sherlock  wrote:
> 
> Hello all, 
> 
> I have been advised by the WMF that if anyone is concerned about being 
> sexually harassed they must report this to AN/I and there are no private 
> mechanisms to report this sort of thing.
> 
> Is this for real?
> 
> Chris Sherlock
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l]

Chris,

More generally, conduct issues are handled locally. We do not have a
central authority to handle issues like this; local communities are, in the
vast majority of cases, capable of handling conduct problems of it’s
editors. Not to mention that T would be incapable of handling every minor
conduct problem.

It also is not something that is usually emailed to emergency@; if there’s
extensive problems with harassment, and local functions do not work,
c...@wikimedia.org will get you in touch with T who can look into the issue.

However, you haven’t tried to handle this locally. Creating an ANI section,
seeing that people aren’t 100% in agreement with your preferred outcome,
and then removing it is not very helpful towards resolving this.

From my somewhat limited looking into the events, there’s been some
problematic shows of incivility on from both parties, with WWGB using the
word “cutie” in an offhand edit summary. It isn’t appropriate, it certainly
didn’t improve their point, but calling it sexual harassment and hoping for
the WMF or others to take immediate and dire action without community input
is misleading and unrealistic. On a collaborative project, problems are
handled collaboratively with uninvolved editors looking at the issue from a
third party perspective, giving their input, and at some point an
administrator coming along to enact the consensus. That’s why noticeboards
of this type exist, which discuss and evaluate conduct issues to seek a
resolution. We do not know how other community members and admins would
have participated in the discussion because it was cut short.

I noticed that you said, on Facebook, that you did not feel safe talking to
WWGB directly about it, and that you did not feel safe on ANI. I’m very
sorry to hear this; though I am not sure what you believe to be unsafe
about leaving a talk page message stating your having taken offense at
WWGB’s remarks, or asking for input from administrators and the community
to resolve the issue, those are the methods of fixing issues. If either
action were met with hostility, insult, or further harassment, there would
be a very clear and simple case for an administrator to take action, and
thus would have been much easier. If WWGB, however, apologized and agreed
not to continue with such conduct in the future, it would also have been
much easier. We don’t have a sort of secret police to handle issues in
private. The community processes exist for a reason, and when permitted to
take place, usually work.

Best regards,
Vermont


On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 17:27 Aron Manning  wrote:

> On Sun, 23 Aug 2020 at 22:43, Chris Sherlock 
> wrote:
>
> > I have been advised by the WMF that if anyone is concerned about being
> > sexually harassed they must report this to AN/I and there are no private
> > mechanisms to report this sort of thing.
> >
> > Is this for real?
>
>
> Assuming you've contacted Trust, "falls outside of the Foundation's
> remit" is a standard answer to receive as a regular editor.
>
> Bringing the issue to ANI it will most likely be ignored. If your issue is
> with a long-term / established editor it has a significant chance to
> boomerang .
>
> Sadly, this is for real and somewhat the reason behind the UCoC proposal.
> Whether that will change this is another question.
>
> Aron
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Aron Manning]

On Sun, 23 Aug 2020 at 22:43, Chris Sherlock 
wrote:

> I have been advised by the WMF that if anyone is concerned about being
> sexually harassed they must report this to AN/I and there are no private
> mechanisms to report this sort of thing.
>
> Is this for real?


Assuming you've contacted Trust, "falls outside of the Foundation's
remit" is a standard answer to receive as a regular editor.

Bringing the issue to ANI it will most likely be ignored. If your issue is
with a long-term / established editor it has a significant chance to
boomerang .

Sadly, this is for real and somewhat the reason behind the UCoC proposal.
Whether that will change this is another question.

Aron
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Ilario valdelli]

Do other kinds of harassment have a different procedure or are tollerated?

On 23/08/2020 22:43, Chris Sherlock wrote:

Hello all,

I have been advised by the WMF that if anyone is concerned about being sexually 
harassed they must report this to AN/I and there are no private mechanisms to 
report this sort of thing.

Is this for real?

Chris Sherlock

Sent from my iPhone
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 



--
Ilario Valdelli
Wikimedia CH
Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
Wikipedia: Ilario
Skype: valdelli
Tel: +41764821371
http://www.wikimedia.ch


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Andy Mabbett]

On Sun, 23 Aug 2020 at 21:50, ktsquare  wrote:

>> they must report this to AN/I

> What is AN/I

   
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Tito Dutta]

>> What is AN/I
:Administrators' Noticeboard/Incidents on-Wiki. This is an administrator's
noticeboard where one can report.

Thanks
User:Titodutta



On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 02:21, ktsquare  wrote:

> What is AN/I
>
> On Sun., Aug. 23, 2020, 4:43 p.m. Chris Sherlock, <
> chris.sherloc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I have been advised by the WMF that if anyone is concerned about being
> > sexually harassed they must report this to AN/I and there are no private
> > mechanisms to report this sort of thing.
> >
> > Is this for real?
> >
> > Chris Sherlock
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Andy Mabbett]

On Sun, 23 Aug 2020 at 21:43, Chris Sherlock  wrote:

> I have been advised by the WMF that if anyone is concerned about being
> sexually harassed they must report this to AN/I and there are no private
> mechanisms to report this sort of thing.
>
> Is this for real?

Not according to:

   https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Harassment

and particularly:

   
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Harassment#Contact_the_Foundation%E2%80%99s_Trust_and_Safety_team


-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[ktsquare]

What is AN/I

On Sun., Aug. 23, 2020, 4:43 p.m. Chris Sherlock, <
chris.sherloc...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I have been advised by the WMF that if anyone is concerned about being
> sexually harassed they must report this to AN/I and there are no private
> mechanisms to report this sort of thing.
>
> Is this for real?
>
> Chris Sherlock
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Sexual harassment

[Chris Sherlock]

Hello all, 

I have been advised by the WMF that if anyone is concerned about being sexually 
harassed they must report this to AN/I and there are no private mechanisms to 
report this sort of thing.

Is this for real?

Chris Sherlock

Sent from my iPhone
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,