Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

On Sat, 30 Jan 2016, Trillium Corsage wrote: 30.01.2016, 14:03, "Maggie Dennis" : The pictures may not be the individuals at all; they may be pornographic pictures of others that are misattributed. And sometimes the attribution is not to a real name, but to their usernames. In all cases, the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

Maggie Dennis wrote: > In the time I've worked at the Wikimedia Foundation, I have > (unsurprisingly, given its reported prevalence) come across this kind of > harassment in my work with Support and Safety (formerly Community > Advocacy). There have been cases where

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

"On 30 January 2016 at 14:20, Pierre-Selim wrote: > We should take such reports seriously, instead of trying to invalidate the > result. The denial is hindering improvements. It certainly wasn't my intention to deny that this occurs, nor it's potentially devastating

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

Il 30/01/2016 18:12, Jane Darnell ha scritto: I think you meant to link this one? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vito=revision=686068089=686006551 Nope, I exactly meant the link I posted :D Mine wasn't a criticism of Bgwhite but I wanted to point out he dealt with it as that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

A similar situation happened to me: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vito=685988175=685926527 or just a couple of days ago most of my uploads at Commons were deleted because a long-term abuser filled them with crappy "{{Copyviol|request file delegation abusive vandalisme copyright}}"

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

Hi Tobias, In addition to Maggie's attempt to explain why the numbers might seem high, the reported percentages on slide #17 are not out of the total pool of respondents (~3800) but out of those who reported experiencing harassment (~1200). e.g. as there were 740 respondents reported "revenge

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

Some of the things that users might consider "revenge porn" would include porn that is sent to them via email (either images or text - both of which I've received), or images/comments posted to their userspace or to other places where it was intended to come to their attention (e.g., obviously

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

I think you meant to link this one? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vito=revision=686068089=686006551 On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Vituzzu wrote: > A similar situation happened to me: > https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vito=685988175=685926527 >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

On 30 January 2016 at 13:14, Tobias wrote: > Almost one third (!) of the respondents were themselves the subject of > revenge porn, defined by the survey as: "publishing of sexually explicit > or sexualised photos of without one's consent". > > > Wait, what?

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

As an oversighter on Wikimedia Commons, I have witness what has been described by Maggie and Philippe. We should take such reports seriously, instead of trying to invalidate the result. The denial is hindering improvements. Le 30 janv. 2016 3:03 PM, "Maggie Dennis" a écrit

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

Hi Maggie, On 01/30/2016 02:35 PM, Maggie Dennis wrote: > In the time I've worked at the Wikimedia Foundation, I have > (unsurprisingly, given its reported prevalence) come across this kind of > harassment in my work with Support and Safety (formerly Community > Advocacy). There have been cases

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

Maggie gave the answer: "and cases where existing pornographic pictures that were not the individual were selected and misattributed as being them." It isn't dependent on an actual published photo. You can take any old photo, slap "Philippe beau fete" on it, and run with it. (You CANbut

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

Hi, Tobias. In the time I've worked at the Wikimedia Foundation, I have (unsurprisingly, given its reported prevalence) come across this kind of harassment in my work with Support and Safety (formerly Community Advocacy). There have been cases where perfectly harmless pictures of the individuals

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

Hi, Tobias. The pictures may not be the individuals at all; they may be pornographic pictures of others that are misattributed. And sometimes the attribution is not to a real name, but to their usernames. In all cases, the intent seems to be to humiliate and hurt the target. Sometimes the goal

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

Thank you Patrick. The (preliminary) report is in my mind deeply disturbing, not merely by how widespread harassment is, but also by what types of harassment respondents cite. User page vandalism and flaming I would have expected, but around 35% of respondents in our community* apparently were

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

Right. Thanks Philippe and Maggie! Tobias ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

Unfortunately, I'm not surprised either. Can't discuss details for obvious reasons, but some of the stuff I saw while on the ArbCom would really make your hair curl. Trolls can get pretty vicious. Todd On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 7:23 AM, Tobias wrote: > Right.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

Hi Tobias, Like Maggie, I was not surprised that people (both men and women) were reporting revenge porn because I know of reports in the Wikimedia community, but like her I was surprised that this survey showed revenge porn being reported by this many people. But it is not surprising that the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

I have been surprised again and again by a casual form of vandalism that goes unchecked because it is possibly seen as humorous. Here is an example of something I have corrected in passing (and can remember how to find in order to link it here):

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

30.01.2016, 14:03, "Maggie Dennis" : > The pictures may not be the individuals at all; they may be pornographic > pictures of others that are misattributed. And sometimes the attribution is > not to a real name, but to their usernames. In all cases, the intent seems > to be to humiliate and hurt

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

Patrick, Thank you for posting this -- excellent work done by our team and deep engagement with the community. I encourage everyone to review as we continue to assess best ways to support healthy and safe Wikimedia environment for all our contributors and readers. Lila On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

Patrick, I also want to thank you and the team for having done this work. It's extremely interesting and informative, and I think it will be very helpful moving forward. Sarah On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Lila Tretikov wrote: > Patrick, > > Thank you for posting this

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 Harassment Survey - Results Report

Thanks Patrick, a wonderful first step. For future updates, I hope you can find ways to add data from automated analysis of interactions, like the League of Legends example Toby shared a few months back. Sam On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Patrick Earley wrote: > Hello