Hi Mina,
I intentionally started a new thread to be able to have a more abstract
discussion about the general policy. I would highly appreciate it if you
won't bring it back to the single case.
Thank you.
Lodewijk
On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 11:48 AM Mina Theofilatou
wrote:
> People: our
People: our movement is founded on TRANSPARENCY. Which is - sadly - totally
lacking in the Support and Safety Department.
The Friendly Spaces policy supposedly protects Wikimedians against threat:
examples of such have been provided. Romaine's behaviour quite simply does
not fall under the
Sorry about that Lodewijk, I thought the change of title was plainly to
make the title more relevant to the discussion.
For all it's worth, my contribution to this discussion in the general
policy sense can be summarised in the capitalised word of my previous
reply's first sentence: TRANSPARENCY.
Unfortunately, almost every tool can be used as a weapon.
Cheers,
Peter
From: Wikimania-l [mailto:wikimania-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Gnangarra
Sent: 29 July 2018 04:45
To: Wikimania general list (open subscription)
Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] Friendly Space Policy (was:
Hi all,
I decided to contribute to this thread, however not in order to elaborate
on my personal opinion on this specific case. This would be inappropriate,
as we do not have sufficient information about it and also out of respect
for the people involved.
Instead, I want to comment, because
On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 7:04 PM Lilli Iliev
wrote:
> According to the Fundamental Rights Agency, 75% of women in qualified
> professions or top management jobs have been sexually harassed[1].
>
Where did you get that figure from? When I Control+F the number "75"
nowhere in that document you
There is a gulf between behavior that might make someone uncomfortable,
which may be the result of cultural differences, and harassment or
violence. We should take care to ensure people who need some education on
the former don't feel like they have been found guilty of the latter.
And such
Hello.
Am 29.07.2018 um 19:27 schrieb Chris Keating:
> to make sure everyone is welcome
You mean everyone that is not a little deaf, speaks not a little too
loud and does not dare to deliver stuff to other sessions?
The hole case is a primary example why such things as a
friendly-space-policy
I disagree that there is no use for a policy at all. Sure, there are laws,
but I would prefer not to have to use them - that we can avoid misbehavior
in the first place. Having a good and consistent policy helps Wikipedians
navigate. Don't (just) define what is forbidden, but (also) define what is
Lilli Iliev, 29/07/2018 20:04:
One reliable way to silence people when they experience harassment as
well as keeping others from speaking out, is to have them experience how
other, non-involved people, would immediately have an opinion on what
happened and judge the case or the person in
On 29 July 2018 at 18:27, Chris Keating wrote:
> Lots of opinions from people going "well this person didn't harass
> me" or "I don't know the specifics but maybe it's just cultural
> differences"
I'm one of the people who commented, early on, on that original
thread; and I don't believe that
On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 8:57 PM Federico Leva (Nemo)
wrote:
> Lilli Iliev, 29/07/2018 20:04:
> > One reliable way to silence people when they experience harassment as
> > well as keeping others from speaking out, is to have them experience how
> > other, non-involved people, would immediately
Thanks for writing this Lilli - I completely agree. Lots of opinions
from people going "well this person didn't harass me" or "I don't know
the specifics but maybe it's just cultural differences" or "omg the
WMF has done something outrageous again" do not really help this kind
of situation.
If
I have no personal knowledge of the recent events at Wikimania, and I will
speak about only the general principles involved.
> True. But for privacy and other reasons, it is impractical to make
> friendly-space violations a matter of public debate,
>
Please provide evidence that backs up that
Hi all,
someone asked me not to comment on this issue anymore, but as I think/hope
that we are now on the meta level, let me remind everyone that a policy is
just a particular aggregate state of norms. Nobody here seems to doubt that
we need norms, especially at and around events. And norms often
One reliable way to silence people when they experience harassment as well
> as keeping others from speaking out, is to have them experience how other,
> non-involved people, would immediately have an opinion on what happened and
> judge the case or the person in question. This is what has
Hello John.
Am 29.07.2018 um 23:40 schrieb John Hendrik Weitzmann:
> Nobody here seems to doubt that we need norms, especially at and around
> events.
I was at 2 Wikimanias, 5 WikiCons, several workshops and meetings, and
nearly 2 dozen of WMDE-chapter-meeting – and only the very least of them
Hi dab,
I'm glad you didn't experience any problems.
May i ask how you conclude that we "survived"? What does it mean? No
incidents? No murders? No near-incidents? I'm just trying to understand how
you evaluate the success of a (no) policy.
Lodewijk
On Mon, Jul 30, 2018, 02:24 DaB. wrote:
>
18 matches
Mail list logo
