allis, OR
==original message==
>>Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 08:41:08 +0100
From: Gerard Meijssen
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month
gender gap
Message-ID:
>>I do not care one whit who you are or why you think
s, OR
==original message==
>>Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 08:41:08 +0100
From: Gerard Meijssen
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month
gender gap
Message-ID:
>>I do not care one whit who you are or why you think you are provoked.
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 10:59 PM, mcc99 wrote:
> But if you think you or anyone else can intimidate me into staying quiet when
> I see something fundamentally wrong happening, guess again.
>
> Now to put it politely, at least to start with:
>
> Go climb a tree.
Well... that was kind of rude. I re
WMF should reconsider the 3-month
gender gap
Message-ID:
<
ca+bw_fvvbcn6bm6dutawbj884a1wmfbumctbnqojvubk5r0...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 4:30 PM, mcc99 wrote:
But in future, I think I'll sign in more often, e
u...@lists.wikimedia.org
> Date:01/08/2015 11:30 AM (GMT-05:00)
> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Cc:
> Subject: Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 130, Issue 29
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 17:01:08 +0100
> From: Austin Hair
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subj
+0100
> From: Austin Hair
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month
> gender gap
> Message-ID:
> <
> ca+bw_fvvbcn6bm6dutawbj884a1wmfbumctbnqojvubk5r0...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=
message
From: wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
Date:01/08/2015 6:28 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Cc:
Subject: Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 130, Issue 25
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 11:19:46 +0100
From: Sebastian Moleski
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-
On 8 January 2015 at 16:46, mcc99 wrote:
> If WMF still wants to pursue this kind of goal (which as you can tell I think
> rests on false assumptions as well as ethically
bup-pow.
- d.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wik
2 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Cc:
Subject: Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 130, Issue 27
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 07:41:56 -0500
From: Risker
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month
gender gap project-related decision
Mess
roups "we are not
> > interested in you right now" you are playing an "us-against-them" game
> and
> > quite probably causing more harm than good.
> >
> >
> > Leigh
> >
> >
> > > Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 09:03:40 -0500
> > &
for it.
> > > > Offence is often available if you search for it hard enough.
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Peter
> > > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
> > &
it hard enough.
> > > Cheers,
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
> > > wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Fæ
> > > Sent: 08 January 2015 06:17 PM
> >
a.org
[mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Keilana
Sent: 08 January 2015 06:36 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap
project-related decision
Hearing people whine “what about the men” because, God forbid, men might not
On 08/01/15 20:04, Austin Hair wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Risker wrote:
Frankly, there's not a single thing I've read, or a single objection I've
seen raised, that wasn't about how unnecessary it is to focus on women. I
don't think we've ever heard that about the global south, or n
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Risker wrote:
> Frankly, there's not a single thing I've read, or a single objection I've
> seen raised, that wasn't about how unnecessary it is to focus on women. I
> don't think we've ever heard that about the global south, or non-European
> languages, or a lot o
I'm just going to preface this by pointing out that I didn't actually
read all of the OP due to a philosophical opposition to giant walls of
text, but I think you've kind of missed the point in a few places.
Also please don't call people names. That's not nice.
On 08/01/15 10:52, geni wrote:
> > Peter
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
> > wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Fæ
> > Sent: 08 January 2015 06:17 PM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikim
:17 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month
gender gap project-related decision
On 8 Jan 2015 16:11, "FRED BAUDER" wrote:
...
I've noticed that women are often quite motivated and good at
writing
grant proposals.
Extending
rom: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
> > wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Fæ
> > Sent: 08 January 2015 06:17 PM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender
> > gap project-r
ssage-
> > From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
> > wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Fæ
> > Sent: 08 January 2015 06:17 PM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender
&g
t; Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
> wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Fæ
> Sent: 08 January 2015 06:17 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gen
--Original Message-
From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Fæ
Sent: 08 January 2015 06:17 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap
project-related decision
On
dia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Austin Hair
Sent: 08 January 2015 06:01 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 4:30 PM, mcc99 wrote:
> But in fu
On 8 Jan 2015 16:11, "FRED BAUDER" wrote:
...
> I've noticed that women are often quite motivated and good at writing
grant proposals.
Extending good faith I would presume this is irony. It does not transmit
well by email. Please keep in mind how offensive this sort of thing appears.
Fae
__
realistic answer to that question?
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Risker
Sent: 08 January 2015 02:42 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should re
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 4:30 PM, mcc99 wrote:
> But in future, I think I'll sign in more often, esp. now that half the
> WikiGods have my uid on an alert trigger now. :)
I think the question is only being asked because you're displaying a
profound lack of understanding of how Wikipedia and Wikime
: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap
project-related decision
I have one simple question: if the Grants program was to focus on some other
key area rather than the gender gap, would we be having this discussion about
how horrible it is to waste time this way? Would we see
n in more often, esp. now that half the WikiGods
have my uid on an alert trigger now. :)
Matt
Original message
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 14:12:39 +0200
From: "Peter Southwood"
To: "'Wikimedia Mailing List'"
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 9:13 AM, Leigh Thelmadatter
wrote:
> I dont think the issue is the idea of encouraging projects that increase
> the participation of women, but rather the message that everything else is
> getting shoved aside.
>
>
I don't see how you can come to this conclusion. His entire
Mailing List; Liam Wyatt
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap
project-related decision
On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 11:29:57 +0100
Liam Wyatt wrote:
> As this thread demonstrates, what discussions about the massive
>gender imbalance in Wikimedia editorship need i
t; you are playing an "us-against-them" game and
> quite probably causing more harm than good.
>
>
> Leigh
>
>
> > Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 09:03:40 -0500
> > From: nawr...@gmail.com
> > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l
...@gmail.com
> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap
> project-related decision
>
> You certainly put a lot of time and effort into being wrong. Any first year
> undergraduate writing course will tell y
You certainly put a lot of time and effort into being wrong. Any first year
undergraduate writing course will tell you that to make an argument you
need to address the counter-arguments, which you have failed even to
mention. Diversity of contributors isn't a social justice goal, or even a
cultural
I have one simple question: if the Grants program was to focus on some
other key area rather than the gender gap, would we be having this
discussion about how horrible it is to waste time this way? Would we see
throwing up of hands in this way if the focus was, say, requests from the
Global Sout
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 12:09 PM, FRED BAUDER wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 11:29:57 +0100
> Liam Wyatt wrote:
>
>> As this thread demonstrates, what discussions about the massive
>> gender imbalance in Wikimedia editorship need is more men discussing why
>> it
>> might or might not be important.
On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 11:29:57 +0100
Liam Wyatt wrote:
As this thread demonstrates, what discussions about the massive
gender imbalance in Wikimedia editorship need is more men discussing
why it
might or might not be important.
Radical feminist notions that men should reduce editing or
part
On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 11:25:23 +0100
Ilario Valdelli wrote:
I partially disagree with this vision.
Without the North American and European men there would not be any
opportunity to say: "we would share the sum of the human knowledge".
Probably Wikimedia would not exist.
True, but our goal was
[mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of mcc99
Sent: 08 January 2015 09:07 AM
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap
project-related decision
Dear fellow Wikipedia devotees,
While I'm new to this list, I've be
Thank you for this thoughtful response. In the United States, at
least, girls routinely test higher than boys on verbal skills and have
recently surpassed young men in attaining higher education in nearly
all fields. There is a lot of dead time in the lives of many women.
They are all over Face
On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 14:53:47 +0530
Srikanth Ramakrishnan wrote:
On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog.
Need I say anything else?
I think you've hit the nail on the head. It should not be easier to
dominate a player-killing MUD than to edit an article on Wikipedia. In
other words, one sh
Hoi,
Given that a frequent complaint is the male chauvinist piggery that is
alive and well and meets not much sanction, this behaviour it being given
as one of the main reasons why so many people leave. I do suggest that the
hand above the head holding attitude of culprits is why we do so poorly. A
On 8 January 2015 at 07:07, mcc99 wrote:
> If you ask any RN the names of the greatest contributors to the nursing
> profession, you'll get a stream of women's names. To suggest that nursing
> "needs" more men or else it won't be able to achieve its greatest potential
> would be a crass and inac
I agree.
Women vs Men has never really stood out as a point of debate before and
ideally shouldn't.
On 08-Jan-2015 4:11 pm, "Ilario Valdelli" wrote:
> Is there any barrier for women to participate?
>
> The discussion is open.
>
> It would be worth if someone attacks a woman for her opinion.
>
> T
Is there any barrier for women to participate?
The discussion is open.
It would be worth if someone attacks a woman for her opinion.
There is more a big barrier in the participation to this thread connected
with a strong level of English to be required to read and to answer to this
thread.
I se
As this thread demonstrates, what discussions about the massive
gender imbalance in Wikimedia editorship need is more men discussing why it
might or might not be important.
--
wittylama.com
Peace, love & metadata
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guideli
I partially disagree with this vision.
Without the North American and European men there would not be any
opportunity to say: "we would share the sum of the human knowledge".
Probably Wikimedia would not exist.
It is correct to say that Wikimedia must offer to *all people* any
opportunity withou
Hi Matt,
as thorough as your characterization of the issue at hand is, as
misguided it is as well. The main point of the gender debate isn't the
physical differences between men and women and some purported
difference in authorship flowing from that. That would rightfully be
considered absurd and
Hi there,
> That said, it doesn't matter who writes the content on Wikipedia so long
> as it's relevant and factual.
>
Who is to decide what is relevant and factual (or indeed, the other
editorial judgements we make in writing aricles)? If the only people doing
that are white North American and
I think that the realistic point of view should be another.
There is a potential number of people who can be contributors (contributors
and not readers) but this potential number must be *realistic*.
Anyway these persons should have something to contribute to wikimedia
projects an basically:
a)
On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog.
Need I say anything else?
On 08-Jan-2015 2:45 pm, "FRED BAUDER" wrote:
>
>
>> That said, it doesn't matter who writes the content on Wikipedia so long
>> as it's relevant and factual.
>>
>
> That's the point; it would not matter if women contributed so
That said, it doesn't matter who writes the content on Wikipedia so
long as it's relevant and factual.
That's the point; it would not matter if women contributed so long as
it's relevant and factual. Half the humans that could contribute are
not. Actually many more than half, as there are ba
Yes. Finally, a voice of reason.
On 8 January 2015 at 08:07, mcc99 wrote:
> Dear fellow Wikipedia devotees,
>
> While I'm new to this list, I've been an avid fan and proponent of
> Wikipedia and all the great service it gives people since it launched.
> People can learn not just all the basics o
Dear fellow Wikipedia devotees,
While I'm new to this list, I've been an avid fan and proponent of Wikipedia
and all the great service it gives people since it launched. People can learn
not just all the basics of nearly any topic imaginable, but for a large number,
readers can with diligence
53 matches
Mail list logo
