Thank you for clarifying Jonathan. I am with you when it comes to the
sensitivity of handling any data of this sort (and any personal data, for
that matter).
As to the need for this kind of data, I believe that it is actually
extremely important. I have to say that in 15 years in the movement, I have
been wondering how we could better learn about the people who participate
in our projects and how this knowledge would affect the way we interact
with each other. I think that there are a lot of things we are not doing
well right now *because* we don't know for sure where people in the
movement actually even categorize themselves. The same way we
translate things for people to have them in their own language,
understanding people's neurological differences or social constraints and
their prevalence in our communities might be tremendously helpful in order
to design training for conflict resolution, newcomers integration, staff
training to work with community members, and even, I imagine, for something
as important as writing the code of conduct in a way that makes sense for
*everyone*.
As I am developing my program around onboarding WMF staff around community
and movement, this is definitely something I want to make sure that we
don't overlook, because I think that the better we understand each other,
the easier it is to work together productively.
Best,
Delphine
On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 9:35 PM Jonathan Morgan <jmor...@wikimedia.org>
wrote:
> Gerard,
>
> To clarify, what grosses me out ("makes me uncomfortable") is the prospect
> of third parties gathering and storing sensitive personal information about
> individual Wikipedia editors without proper oversight mechanisms. Health
> and medical data is one of the most sensitive kinds of individual data that
> exists. In the United States, as in many other countries, access to this
> information is heavily regulated--as it should be. Researchers who gather
> this kind of data should be held to a very high standard of proof that they
> will use the data responsibly, and take specific care to avoid information
> leakage. Ideally, they should be held legally responsible for proper
> behavior--and that depends heavily on their local jurisdiction and on their
> own truthfulness and transparency--things the rest of us in the movement
> have little control over. In my opinion, anyone who cares about both
> science and ethics should always err on the side of avoiding harm
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belmont_Report>--even if that sometimes
> means refraining from asking research questions that have scientific merit
> or that could yield practical community benefit.
>
> To your comment about Clarice Phelps, I'm not aware of this individual (or
> article?) and do not know what you are referring to. But I would caution
> you not to make public speculative statements about the mental health
> status of any editor, or make generalizations about the motivations or
> actions of all people who you believe have particular mental
> characteristics, based on specific incidents you have witnessed or
> interactions you have had. If I have misread your statement, I apologize
> for the error.
>
> Best,
> Jonathan
>
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 11:29 AM Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Hoi,
> > We regularly have problems with people. We have people who are banned
> > because people think they are problematic. We have banned people who have
> > contributed hugely to our projects. The notion that it is stigmatising
> is a
> > notion whereby we wash our hands in innocence, we do not want to know.
> >
> > It is one thing that you personally are grossed out but I hope you
> > understand that given that this is an issue we need to address. It is not
> > only people who do not care for rules, it is also the people who obsess
> > about rules. You find it in the excessive attention for Clarice Phelps.
> > People do get hurt, people do get traumatised because of this
> inattention.
> > Thanks,
> > GerardM
> >
> > On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 at 17:58, Jonathan Morgan <jmor...@wikimedia.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > There's this study
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:The_Construction_and_Application_of_Personality_Profile_Based_on_User_Behavior_in_Wikipedia
> > > >
> > > but I don't know if it was ever completed (and as you can infer from my
> > > posts on the talkpage, I very much hope it was NOT).
> > >
> > > In general, any kind of psychometric profiling of Wikipedia editors
> kind
> > of
> > > grosses me out. But as an armchair psychologist myself, as well as a
> > > non-neurotypical individual, sure I'm happy to hypothesize that there
> are
> > > many of us in the projects. It takes a certain mindset to find the
> > process
> > > of building an encyclopedia using 20-year old software paradigms to be
> > > engaging ;)
> > >
> > > - J
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 8:49 AM RhinosF1 - <rhino...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Evening all,
> > > >
> > > > I hope everyone is doing well given the crazy world we’re living in.
> > > >
> > > > I was having a conversation with a few users on Discord today and we
> > were
> > > > wondering whether wikimedia (or users of other similiar sites would
> be
> > > > fine) disproportinately fall into the category of having aspergers,
> > ADHD
> > > > and other simmilar conditions.
> > > >
> > > > It would be even better if anyone knew what sort of areas these users
> > > were
> > > > more likely to work in.
> > > >
> > > > Following a chat with Issac in #wikimedia-research, I understand
> there
> > > > isn’t much support for this kind of research as users may not want to
> > > > reveal this information and there is no clear reason for collecting
> the
> > > > information but if anyone knows of past research or has any
> > information,
> > > > that would be helpful.
> > > >
> > > > Stay Safe,
> > > > RhinosF1
> > > > --
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Samuel
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > > > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jonathan T. Morgan
> > > Senior Design Researcher
> > > Wikimedia Foundation
> > > User:Jmorgan (WMF) <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jmorgan_(WMF)
> >
> > > (Uses He/Him)
> > >
> > > *Please note that I do not expect a response from you on evenings or
> > > weekends*
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> >
>
>
> --
> Jonathan T. Morgan
> Senior Design Researcher
> Wikimedia Foundation
> User:Jmorgan (WMF) <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jmorgan_(WMF)>
> (Uses He/Him)
>
> *Please note that I do not expect a response from you on evenings or
> weekends*
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
--
*Delphine Ménard* (she/her)
Senior Orientation Specialist
Strategy Liaison
User:Delphine_(WMF)
Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
