http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/womens-blog/2014/oct/06/men-only-un-conference-gender-equality-if-only-it-was-a-joke?CMP=fb_gu
I can't believe how the author tries to make excuses for them...
___
Gendergap mailing list
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/10/09/polish-town-to-have-monument-honoring-wikipedia/?intcmp=obmod_ffointcmp=obnetwork
Polish town to have monument honoring Wikipedia
The lack of anatomical precision did confuse me a bit as to whether male
or female. Others pointed out narrow hips and broad
/Wikiprojekt:Gender_Studies
Better late than never noticed a Polish Gender studies group so left
message there too.
https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyskusja_wikiprojektu:Gender_Studies#Pomnik_Wikipedii.3F
CM
On 10/10/2014 2:04 PM, Carol Moore dc wrote:
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/10/09/polish
I've made short lists of workshops and edit-a-thons on a couple relevant
pages.
I'm wondering if there's a place that exists or could be created linking
to as many as we can find that have pages somewhere?
I.e., people can add theirs there; others can back track through history
and add them
Took material from original draft and put here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force/articles
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force/research
The final momument was unveiled and it looks like, and I was told, it
has two, women in it. Yeah!
https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomnik_Wikipedii_w_S%C5%82ubicach
Article on Polish Wikipedia with photo
Images.google search of Polish monument Wikipedia gets a couple more
good photo returns.
Mostly technical article. For those interested in this topic:
http://www.pbs.org/idealab/2014/11/how-to-ethically-and-responsibly-identify-gender-in-large-datasets/
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
On 11/26/2014 12:52 AM, Risker wrote:
I have, however, entered a plea that they rename the case. The
decision they're voting on now has almost nothing at all to do with
the Gender Gap Task Force, and isn't really addressing any of
problematic behaviours that are evident on the talk pages of
On 11/26/2014 1:37 PM, Kevin Gorman wrote:
It's noteworthy that they are not non-appealable blocks. I honestly
don't think this is beyond the scope of the list, although it's
certainly a depressing topic. Allowing severe gendered slurs to be
bandied about with essentially no penalty is
Sorry if in aggravated state yesterday and ranting...
Anyway, as listed here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force/research
The study's talk page has ongoing discussions of people being annoyed
about this issue. Probably first place
On 11/27/2014 11:22 AM, Tim Davenport wrote:
Note well: in the matter of Mr. Corbett we are dealing with the issue
of CIVILITY not the matter of THE WIKIPEDIA GENDER GAP.
If you read the evidence and the GGTF page you'd see Eric Corbett was
being disruptive (while not always uncivil)
On 11/27/2014 12:36 PM, Reguyla wrote:
Carol: My guess is that pretty much everyone commenting here has and
continues to, read the GGTF case. I also agree that Eric can be harsh
and his use of certain words offends people. Likewise others in this
case also didn't act very well.
Personally I
Pulling out a couple of comments for reply from Marie's statement:
On 11/30/2014 1:46 AM, Marie Earley wrote:
..
In particular this comment:
...As has been indicated on the talk page of the proposed decision,
/repeatedly,/ there is some question as to exactly /which/ women this
group seems to
On 11/30/2014 1:36 PM, Risker wrote:
Well, hold on. The content dispute that is being described is one
that rages within the feminist community (note the lack of gender
there - it encompasses people of all genders), and is not a male vs
female thing. Often as not, it is women disagreeing on
On 11/30/2014 11:51 AM, Kathleen McCook wrote:
The only solution would be lack of anonymity. That won't fly, but it
would cause the creepiness to go away.
I used to think that too. But some people don't care about people
knowing who they are, what they think or who the mess with. I don't
Sorry about screwy formatting... Let's try that again...
On 12/2/2014 11:22 AM, Carol Moore dc wrote:
*Nathan* nawrich at gmail.com
mailto:gendergap%40lists.wikimedia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BGendergap%5D%20Gendergap%20achievement%20awardIn-Reply-To=%3CCALKX9dSohgumfQBmSBW7bfC23uJ%3DgiD5i9E6X
On 12/4/2014 3:41 AM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
The URL I just posted goes to the wrong survey (since there are two
sections with the same header on that page). Here is a better URL:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Civility#Arbcom.27s_position_on_expletives
They are discussing whether
On 12/9/2014 9:08 AM, Risker wrote:
Going to be honest here, I think the more interesting statistic is
that there are only 590 voters in an active user base of about
30,000. I think this may reflect a change in the degree of importance
the community places on the Arbitration Committee.
They
Let's just call it what it is - internet fraud...
On 12/10/2014 12:02 PM, regu...@gmail.com wrote:
That is joe jobbing.
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device
-- Original message--
*From: *LB
*Date: *Wed, Dec 10, 2014 11:58 AM
*To: *Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to
On 12/10/2014 12:47 PM, Nathan wrote:
No, nothing described below constitutes fraud of any kind.
On 12/10/2014 1:01 PM, regu...@gmail.com wrote:
That depends on how you interpret it. No monetary gain was there but
they a r e userping someones identity for personal gain.
How do you know?
This NY Times article - Learning to Love Criticism by Tara Mohrsept -
itself has been criticized for downplaying the negative effects constant
criticism has on women; salient quotes:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/28/opinion/sunday/learning-to-love-criticism.html?_r=0
/A NEW study by the
Speculation on the monetary gain definition of fraud is lots of
fun. However, we all know fraud has a wider meaning as
two dictionary definitions show.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fraud
1 a : deceit, trickery; specifically : intentional perversion of truth
in order to induce
On 12/10/2014 5:14 PM, JJ Marr wrote:
Does anyone have a proposed action plan to do anything about this?
First, there definitely are all kinds of groupings and cliques and maybe
even a couple dominated by women. Given it was one particular group of
guys and their allies that went after GGTF,
I kept providing this link to editors and Arbitrators during Arbitration
to show just how obsessed the media is Wikipedia's gendergap, but who
believes this loud mouthed woman?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force/media
Of course I
On 12/11/2014 6:33 PM, Samuel Klein wrote:
The Tor Project today put out a statement against online harassment,
in particular the singling out of women:
https://blog.torproject.org/blog/solidarity-against-online-harassment
It's worth a read, and I'm sure they would welcome comments from other
On 12/11/2014 6:13 PM, Risker wrote:
Well, I suppose the Arbitration Committee will now figure out why I
thought the case name should be changed.
Risker/Anne
The name is accurate. It was the interactions at GGTF that started the
hullabaloo. The Arbitration committee was coming out against
On 12/11/2014 10:10 PM, Risker wrote:
..
If people on this list insist that it really was all about the GGTF,
then the fact that the behaviours that resulted in the most
significant sanctions were all pointed at people who had a longer
history of activity at the GGTF than those who had a
On 12/23/2014 8:40 AM, Nathan wrote:
On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 1:44 AM, Leigh Honeywell le...@hypatia.ca
mailto:le...@hypatia.ca wrote:
With my mod hat on, Neotarf, please cease the you could's here.
Further hypotheticals will get you modded.
Thanks,
-Leigh
What about
Nathan said. Please tread lightly. (From personal experience!!)
Sarah
On Dec 24, 2014 8:22 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com
mailto:nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Carol Moore dc
carolmoor...@verizon.net mailto:carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote:
http
On 12/29/2014 12:31 PM, Marie Earley wrote:
Is it possible to post some of the stuff that has been mentioned on
here on the GGTF talk page
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force
It feels like the two have nothing in common at
As long as (mostly male) Wikipedia editors are allowed to insult and
harass editors whose edits they oppose for whatever reason Wikipedia
cannot retain women, no matter how much they follow the suggestions
below. (Unless of course they focus on shaming the WMF until it uses
its terms of
This point is so important I gave it its own subject line. Perhaps this
language can be worked into the statement of purpose of all the WMF
Gender gap projects... I also think Kerry should turn her whole
excellent statement into an essay for the WMF site and it should be
linked from GGTF
In my experience, except for alleged women coming to GGTF talk age and
arbitration page, and a transwoman in Austrian economics, I only ran
into one woman who was particularly insulting. And that was on the
highly sensitive Death of Caylee Anthony article where tempers sometimes
ran high. So
people working in my area of interest on the English
Wikipedia, so that I feel I can lean more on the work of others.
On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Carol Moore dc
carolmoor...@verizon.net mailto:carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote:
This point is so important I gave it its own subject line
On 12/30/2014 11:17 AM, LB wrote:
I think there is very little that Carol and I would agree on when it
comes to subjects and article topics, and we definitely have different
editing styles, but I absolutely agree with her on one thing, and that
is the hostility on Wikipedia is a turn-off to a
The below definitely are interesting issues which deserve their own
thread. I kept reading the proposals but had not run into the
implementation very often.
On 12/30/2014 3:24 PM, Risker wrote:
Keep in mind that the majority of Wikimedians (i.e., people making
edits on the 900+ sites hosted by
Re: my idea for practice women's wikipeida, it's only good if someone
does it and it succeeds. At least Tim and friends can’t “Misc. For
Delete it! Just brain storming...
Also, keeping track of all good ideas like those from Kerry...
Not sure what the difference between Sarah's idea below and
http://www.theguardian.com/news/2014/dec/30/-sp-rebecca-solnit-listen-up-women-are-telling-their-story-now
Despite the ongoing pandemic of violence against women, the threats
online and the harassment on the streets, women’s voices assumed an
unprecedented power in 2014, writes Rebecca Solnit.
On 2/4/2015 8:42 PM, George Herbert wrote:
Be aware - someone is forging mail to the list in members' names.
George William Herbert
Sent from my iPhone
That's scary, cause it's so easy to do. So beware questionable messages
from
known and credible users...
I just took a look and two of the editors were big
critics of GGTF on my talk page, it's talk page
and during arbitration and big defenders of the
individual best known for using the C word
including supporting him on his talk page...
___
Gendergap
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/23/wikipedia-bans-editors-from-gender-related-articles-amid-gamergate-controversy
Note that they have changed it from original five feminists banned to
more accurate account. I see some other reports on Guardian article also
updated their versions.
On 12/23/2014 6:52 AM, WereSpielChequers wrote:
That was a death of article. I suspect there are articles that cover
ISIS killing people, if they had only killed one person it might well
be titled death of. Since they seem keen to torture enslave or
murder anyone who doesn't share their brand
Since I started a minor brouhaha on cisgender, I figured I should
provide some examples of women (and feminists) who dislike the phrase.
Frankly, I never have gotten a handle on what gender means and never use
the phrase gender at all except in gender gap, only because sex gap
obviously is
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
Post : Wikimedia at FOSDEM 2015
URL: http://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/02/11/wikimedia-at-fosdem-2015/
Posted : February 11, 2015 at 17:39
Author : asherman2015
Tags : developers, FOSDEM, free software, software, Wikimedia,
Wikipedia
Categories : Chapters, Events,
http://dailyuw.com/archive/2015/02/16/news/feminists-aim-fix-wikipedia-gender-gap#.VONoci58uSo
Feminists aim to fix the Wikipedia gender gap
Good story about Amanda and Monika's edit-a-thon!
CM
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard#Statement_on_the_GamerGate_case
Obviously another statement to the press.
*”Among on things says: “The Committee’s preliminary findings have been
represented in some media stories as targeting feminist editors and
More articles, a couple of which I may answer. Let's face it, the main
issue in both GGTF and Gamergate is males going NUTS because females
want a more civil and less violent atmosphere and world. As I write in
article linked below, Robin Morgan (formerly MS. Editor) has written
that the
On 1/25/2015 1:03 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote:
After reviewing the Arbcom case, I don't even know who got the idea
that any of the contributing editors are feminist, per se. No one even
mentions the word, except once, when describing a subject that was
slandered in the gamer gate article(s).
I
On 1/23/2015 10:34 PM, Sarah wrote:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 8:14 PM, J Hayes slowki...@gmail.com
mailto:slowki...@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/23/wikipedia-bans-editors-from-gender-related-articles-amid-gamergate-controversy
On 1/31/2015 2:47 PM, Carol Moore dc wrote:
As I write in article linked below, Robin Morgan (formerly MS.
Editor) has written that the main value to males is proving their
manhood through violence (including cursing and swearing, especially
at women).
http://www.carolmoore.net/sfm
Was thinking about reforming wikipedia again! (fool that I am) and I
started fantasizing about running into some billionaires I used to know
and suggesting they just grab a mirror of Wikipedia and do it the right
way
Well, anyway, to make a long story, short I ran into this Wikipedia page
On 1/9/2015 7:37 PM, JJ Marr wrote:
You should try out Wikia. Make a female friendly Wikipedia, or
something like that.
Thanks. Have been meaning to explore it for other uses. Did see
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page which was pretty amusing...
It could be a place to do a
On 1/9/2015 8:23 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
Google has taken various active steps over the years towards
penalising mirror sites, including Wikipedia mirrors.
Guess you just saved someone a couple million bucks :-)
Though obviously companies/nonprofits with a lot of clout could always
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Address_the_gender_gap
I just noticed this and hadn't seen it announced here; sorry if duplicate.
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
I see several successful edit-a-thons mentioned.
My mere question this time :-)
Are the various sexism issues addressed at all (i.e., insults, harassment,
double-standards) and what are the ways advised to deal with them.
I know I'd feel better knowing that there is a constructive way to deal
There are definitely dozens of really good projects in there. But the
one that I think has the most promise for making a real sea-change is
this one because it deals with males changing their behavior.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Allies
Hopefully some guys -
OK, I'm finally going through now to see if issues I care about are covered.
The good news is there is a page sorting them by category and displaying
the proposal name.
So check it out before it's too late.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Inspire/Ideas_by_theme
A few obviously
On 3/4/2015 2:11 PM, Alex Wang 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
This is great and a motivation for us to go through past and new ideas
and add our favorites.
http://www.wired.com/2015/03/wikipedia-sexism/
Of course they don't cover disruption of Gender gap project,
but do mention Gamergate.
And most of the replies are absurdly sexist, just like on
the Inspire talk page.
Trying to get up energy to reply to both, but have been
happy doing own thing
On 3/26/2015 3:26 AM, Jane Darnell wrote:
Kerry,
Thanks for that effort and I totally agree. Dyed-in-the-wool
Wikipedians quickly develop a blind eye for other ways of approaching
the topic of an edit-a-thon and it is the fresh perspective of the
attendees that keeps us up-to-date and
On 1/25/2015 2:09 PM, Chris Keating wrote:
I'd be happy to help, assuming another man doesn't imbalance things
Chris
I definitely think we need another woman. I'd step up, but as a banned
from wikipedia feminist already, I won't embarrass anyone by doing so.
CM
On 1/25/2015 6:17 PM, Nathan wrote:
I think the lesson it sends is that a righteous cause is not a defense
against accusations of disruption, nor a license to violate other
policies. I'm sure that among the restricted people are those with
positions I'd support along with many others, but
I think in both your case and Devil's Advocate (even though you take
opposite positions) there may have been annoyance that you both very
vocally took the wrong position on GGTF on the arbitration talk pages
so this may be at least partial payback...
On 1/25/2015 8:12 PM, Tarc . wrote:
On 4/10/2015 6:33 PM, Siko Bouterse wrote:
This is the grant proposal referenced at the end of that article
(currently under review as part of Inspire):
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/More_Female_Architects_on_Wikipedia
I remember NOT commenting on that one because I figured,
There was one very silly comment at the blog entry
http://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/05/01/meet-the-inspire-grantees/
So I couldn't help commenting on what I see as the big problem...
Having lots more edit-a-thons, etc. to get women to try Wikipedia is
great. But we can’t keep just ignoring the
Hmmm, looks like some guys even object to edit-a-thons, trashing their
posters
on campus...
http://www.newsrecord.org/news/students-combat-gender-imbalance-online/article_fd100a5c-e13c-11e4-9d73-d3ef3275ba46.html
On 5/2/2015 11:43 PM, Carol Moore dc wrote:
There was one very silly comment
over unfamiliar policies?
On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 3:39 PM, Carol Moore dc
carolmoor...@verizon.net mailto:carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote:
On 4/10/2015 6:33 PM, Siko Bouterse wrote:
This is the grant proposal referenced at the end of that
article (currently under review
On 6/22/2015 11:46 AM, Marie Earley wrote:
I'm not keen on the phrase female-related content, I posted this
transcript of an exchange I had with an editor
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/2015-April/005670.html
in April.
When I dared to suggest that women could be interested
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/21/opinion/can-wikipedia-survive.html?_r=0
Gender gap is one of many issues mentioned. Thought not the most
divisive one.
Luckily I don't feel like going through my list of various solutions,
much of which have to do with giving up with tyranny of
On 5/26/2015 8:35 PM, LB wrote:
Due to off-wiki harassment, I have retired. Thank you to those of you
who have been friendly with me over the past year.
Lightbreather
Plus all that on-wiki harassment!
I did notice something interesting and actually positive in
Lightbreather's arbitration,
Moore dc
carolmoor...@verizon.net mailto:carolmoor...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 5/26/2015 8:35 PM, LB wrote:
Due to off-wiki harassment, I have retired. Thank you
to those of you who have been friendly with me over
the past
On 7/2/2015 4:37 PM, Neotarf wrote:
Samuel Klein I think has a point that harassment and sexual
harassment are not necessarily the same, the second being more of a
civil rights issue.
Harassment and sexual harassment can be done by men to women or women to
men.
However, harassment BECAUSE
At last, a story about Wikipedia being used against sexism, as opposed
to BEING sexist!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3089709/Sexist-tech-company-faces-backlash-MEN-refusing-apologize-using-scantily-clad-lingerie-models-ads.html
When Twitter user Damian Hickey jumped in by sharing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-08-19/Op-ed
Op-ed
WP:THREATENING2MEN: The English Wikipedia's misogynist infopolitics and
the hegemony of the asshole consensus
By Bryce Peake
Check it out...
___
Gendergap mailing
They did great work. Assumedly more info on how long the website will
be up and how to download materials will be forthcoming.
Forwarded Message
Subject:Announcing the shutdown of the Ada Initiative
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2015 08:48:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: The Ada
Yes, they'll be up. Yeah!
On 4 August 2015 at 10:29, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net
mailto:carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote:
They did great work. Assumedly more info on how long the website
will be up and how to download materials will be forthcoming.
Forwarded
Which really is about the limitations that society (patriarchy) tries to
impose on women and girls saying NO! Good one to play at beginning of
(or encourage people to watch before) workshops or whatever...
The best that commercial advertising can be... (even better than buy the
world a coke
I saw the loser spin on some TV report as well. I've definitely found
the guys who gave me the most grief were psychologically disturbed. (Of
course I consider patriarchal dominance behavior the main psychological
disturbance of the human race.)
This often is combined with some grievance
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_gap#Participate
I was starting to get confused about the multiplicity of links lately,
some of which are a bit confusing.
I don't have the energy to figure it all out and update
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_gap#Participate at the moment.
they can stay out of camera
range and ask any comments they make not be taped. That is done at a
lot of different events.
On 7/13/2015 10:46 PM, Risker wrote:
On 13 July 2015 at 21:37, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net
mailto:carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote:
On 7/13/2015 3:50 PM
the woman at whose expense he was having his fun on
those porn sites, will help women's participation?
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Carol Moore dc
carolmoor...@verizon.net mailto:carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote:
The good news is this time they actually have a long list of
problematic
be they are OK if a narrator says their words and their face is
pixellated, or perhaps they need their bit replaced by a shot of someone
reacting to their words and the narrator saying a participant gave a
personal example of harassment
On 14 July 2015 at 13:40, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net
I'm not sure what some of the seemingly most female-unfriendly parts of
the Internet might be so Ellie would have to be more specific.
But in my experience writing in a variety of political and economic and
history-related articles on Wikipedia, it's all about male intellectual
territory
The good news is this time they actually have a long list of problematic
issues and are not just getting rid of editors for trumped up ones like
that did with Neotarf and I, i.e., just listing of 5 or 6 examples of
being snotty to (powerful and connected) editors who were obnoxiously
harassing
I confess I had too much fun sparring with them yesterday, but had
enough and don't feel like responding to last half dozen responses to
myself, or those to lots of others who were sympathetic to the views of
so many women on Wikipedia.
The "arguments" are so much like the harassment we got
It seems like every time I ask this question I get vague answers
regarding "legal issues" "liability" "can't determine content"
"community backlash" etc. Yet under
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use it looks like there is
more than enough room for the Foundation to propose and
billionaires fed up with certain vicious POV pushing on
Wikipedia who might be talked into it by the right entrepreneurs. Too
bad I clam up when rich people are in the vicinity... Must overcome that
hangup!! ;-)
CM
On 22 October 2015 at 19:08, Carol Moore dc <carolmoor...@verizon.
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/10/how-wikipedia-is-hostile-to-women/411619/
Goes into lots of details...
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
On 10/6/2015 4:16 AM, Hannah Penntreth wrote:
I didn't respond because responding to misogyny like "Well done,
feminism. Now men are afraid to help women at work" is pointless. Don't
wrestle the pig, you just get muddy and the pig likes it.
Ogress
Unfortunately, I was more interested in
What we really need is trained mediators who have admin powers to
sanction those who refuse to engage in mediation or who refuse to change
their wicked ways.
And since there job is enhancing civility on Wikipedia, which is one of
the goals of the foundation, maybe foundation could figure out
On 10/6/2015 9:32 AM, rupert THURNER wrote:
carol rightly pointed out to not mix mail threads, so let me create a
dedicated thread. do you think there is a possibility to address the
source of anger, and dealing with anger in a better way we do now? see
for some initial reasoning below. my
Because of a vacation and wedding I'll only be able to make Sunday,
assuming not too tired. Plus the schedule pretty empty that day except
for art and feminism. Thought there ARE more spaces for meetings then
and maybe Sunday AM in one of the "Unconference sessions" or other open
spaces would
On 10/4/2015 5:59 AM, Robert Williams wrote:
Well, what I'd like to say is that some of these arguments do make
sense. While men shouldn't get over-sensitive over perceived
"harassment" of them, neither should women just whine about
harassment.--Eat me, I'm an azuki
The problem is is the
On 10/5/2015 11:56 PM, Risker wrote:
On 5 October 2015 at 23:30, Carol Moore dc <carolmoor...@verizon.net
<mailto:carolmoor...@verizon.net>> wrote:
On 10/5/2015 10:11 PM, rupert THURNER wrote:
what do you
think about anger management in this context, what i su
Of course, the problem is that there are so many paid writer/activists,
often sock puppets, who work daily to promote certain agendas and
tarnish the reputations of those who agree with those agendas.
I found this writing about the Israel-Palestine conflict, some war/peace
issues and economic
Once again this is an area which needs research and numbers, starting
with looking at all the complaints and even mentions of harassment at
WP:ANI and WP:Arbitration for say the last 5 years. If I wasn't busy
catching up on my own projects, I'd help any of the researchers who have
come by
The relevance is that some wikipedia editors would like to shut us all
up about harassment and civility and have made or will increase making
these kinds of arguments...
Already made:
"I'm a serious contributor with 100 contributions a day and I shouldn't
have to put up with petty nonsense
On 9/27/2015 1:49 AM, rupert THURNER wrote:
anne, thank you so much, for the first time i think i understand the
problem. "rot in hell" is a very good example of anger. anger is
something common on wikipedia, anger management is something
surprisingly ignored.
Just in case people don't
I'll be happy to see a lot of the information and reasoning explained in
the harassment document, including first encouraging people to contact
an administrator. (Identifying administrators who are experienced in the
topic would help too.)
Reasons one might not immediately contact police -
101 - 200 of 238 matches
Mail list logo
