Carol Moore dc | 29 Jan 19:51 2015
Picon
Picon

Arbitration Committee statement on Gamergate

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 attempting to prevent their contributions to gender-related topics. This is inaccurate. The findings of the Arbitration Committee deal exclusively with the documented conduct of editors on the English Wikipedia. They do not consider editor opinion, identity, affiliation, or beliefs, nor do they take into consideration an editor’s actions or affiliations outside of their participation on English Wikipedia, unless those actions are directly related to facilitating disruption on the encyclopedia. The Arbitration Committee does not and cannot take a stance on the content of articles, nor on broader issues such as the Gamergate controversy itself.”

(Comment: ArbCom doesn’t in the least share the prejudices of the vocal tiny minority of editors who voted them in? - a large portion of whom are mysoginists opposed to civility?)

AND:
“ a reminder for administrators on appropriate actions pertaining to biographies of living persons.”

(Comment: Like that ever sticks for anyone “the community” doesn’t like or isn’t willing to stick their necks out about.)

*Discussion page about Committees statement.  Again, sometimes hard to figure out what the posters' povs are.  I'll read it later and save comments til see if people are interested...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard#Statement_on_the_GamerGate_case
 

_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Carol Moore dc | 29 Jan 19:35 2015
Picon
Picon

Foundation statement on Gamergate and comments

https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/01/27/civility-wikipedia-gamergate/
First, FYI, Foundation comment from Phillipe Beaudette; the comments section is interesting because gamergates don't seem to find it as necessary to point out what their perspective is as those who take an opposite view or push neutrality.

Some interesting comments including:

* Mark Bernstein link to Sarah's comment on GGTF.
(Comment: His article is a good outline of what happened.
http://www.markbernstein.org/Jan15/Infamous.html
And let me say here that I am one individual who wants to see non-governmental/nonviolent education and voluntary social sanctions used to diminish the playing of violent games - and the making of gratuitously violent movies - to zilch. The violent reactions of those gamers who merely believed other women wanted to do so shows how sick the gaming industry is and many gamers have become.)
 
* "Wikipedia will never have more female editors, because they are all at RationalWiki. "  (Comment: I doubt it, though their article on gamergate has lots of interesting dirt on the gamers.)

* "You don’t care about off site harassment. You don’t care about on site harassment. The best part is, you’re going to continue wondering why your volunteers are overwhelmingly male."  (Comment: Good one!)

* "And now it’s time for Wikipedia and the ArbCom members to get a taste of what GamerGate supporters have experienced over the last half year, as the biased press, so-called “social justice” warriors, and radical third-wave feminists sling false accusations and slander depicting Wikimedia as anti-Feminist misogynistic avatars of “The Patriarchy” who are problematically silencing the pure and true words of underprivileged minority and feminist editors who are simply fighting against bullying and harassment propagated by those “nasty MRA GG terrorists” (by engaging in bullying, doxxing, and harassment themselves, but it’s all good because that’s “punching up”)." (Comment: Paranoid?)

* "What a load of horse puckey. The Wikipedia only cares about civility when it is convenient; when it has to do with, say, an editor who writes hundreds of articles for them, then civility policy is set aside.  The English Wiki Arb Committee sanctioned veteran editors who were keeping the Gamergate topic area free of the rape & death threat style harassment and innuendo that Zoe Quinn, Brianna Wu and others were subjected to." Part of one of Tarc's comments.

* Carol decided to weigh in too:

I thought ArbCom was practicing institutionalized harassment when it just let a few trollish editors totally new to me trash me on the GGTF arbitration before it banned me.  (Note, I only used phrase gangbangers for harassers AFTER it was clear ArbCom was going to ban me. And I stand by the phrase.)

It is unbelievable that with the Gamergate Arbitration they have removed editors working to make an article neutral from a flood of off-Wikipedia trolls who evidently also flooded the Arbitration.

It's time for the Foundation to decide if it's on the side of civilization or psychotic chaos.  I mean will it really lose that much money - and respect in the tech industry - if it chooses civilization? And will it really lose more trollish editors than the decent ones it will bring back or attract?

Once the tech issues are solved, how about putting a few million bucks into promotion and education to bring such editors in and keep them? How many hundreds of Techies will WMF continue to need??
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Carol Moore dc | 29 Jan 03:24 2015
Picon
Picon

Final arbitration decision on GamerGate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration.2FRequests.2FCase.2FGamerGate_closed

They lessened the sanctions on just about everyone except those who previously got a community topic ban; only one individual was banned.

So there is SOME sensitivity to bad publicity.

CM
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
J Hayes | 27 Jan 04:31 2015
Picon

Nitin Nohria, Dean of the Harvard Business School, talks about leadership, case studies, and efforts to help women succeed at the school.

charlie rose interview with HBS dean
http://charlierose.com/watch/60505591
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
LB | 25 Jan 19:21 2015
Picon

Goings-on at WER

Some of you may already be aware of this, but there is a "did you ask any women" question that has blown up all out-of-proportion at WP Editor Retention.


Lightbreather
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
J Hayes | 24 Jan 04:14 2015
Picon

press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
LB | 23 Jan 03:03 2015
Picon

Question at the Village Pump

There is a question at the Village Pump that should be of interest to members of this list.


Lightbreather
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Neotarf | 22 Jan 20:36 2015
Picon

A women's forum on MetaFilter

A discussion on MetaFilter from a month ago on starting a women's forum :

http://metatalk.metafilter.com/23537/A-MeFi-womens-forum
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
LB | 21 Jan 21:15 2015
Picon

Request re the Gendergap mailing list subscription page

I would like to suggest that the Gendergap mailing list subscription page include the five bullet points in the Gender Gap "Discuss" section

  • No personal attacks
  • Try to stay on topic and take other things off-list
  • Try to turn fighting into constructive discussion, or disengage/take it off-list
  • Help guide discussion toward concrete action
  • Be aware that using an aggressive or argumentative tone (or even just posting too much) can discourage people from participating

Lightbreather
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Amanda Menking | 20 Jan 18:53 2015

Re: surveys of active female editors?

Hi All,

These are all really good and complex questions because individual differences, areas of work within Wikipedia, and personal experiences can greatly affect why an editor of any gender chooses to stay or go. From my research thus far, I do, however, think the predominant culture and norms on EN Wikipedia tend to make it more challenging for editors who are more “feminine” (e.g., not more female or only women).

I have done and am continuing to do some work re: these questions. See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Women_and_Wikipedia/Midpoint.

Part of the challenge is that interviews (e.g., scheduling, conducting, transcribing, member checking, coding, analysis) are time intensive, but the provide much richer and deeper information than surveys. Also, participants tend to self-select for both. I’ve spoken with only a few women who don’t like the term “gender gap” and who don’t see a lack of women participating as a problem in and of itself. Also, I’ve found it difficult to recruit men to participate. I would love to interview trolls too, but again—no takers yet.

I’ll be publishing my final IEG report on April 1. If my participants grant permission, I’ll share the anonymized, redacted transcripts as well as the survey results and 9 months of Gendergap mailing list data my students and I have coded and analyzed.

An excerpt from a note (currently in press) I’ve written with Ingrid Erickson (Rutgers) re: early findings:

Wikipedia, perhaps the most successful large-scale, online collaboration in the world, is a storied space of democratic values and meritocracy in action—as many within the CHI and CSCW communities have extensively detailed [e.g.,13,18,19,22,23,24]. Yet underneath its idealized veneer, Wikipedia in practice proves to have a notable gender gap. Unlike user distribution reports on social media platforms, which trend more toward representative parity or even a greater number of female users [7], surveys of Wikipedia users indicate the overwhelming majority of contributors are male [14]. Both the popular media [e.g., 9,21,27] and scholars [e.g., 1,6,20] have begun to explore Wikipedia’s participation disparities, raising questions about editor recruitment and retention, content coverage and bias, and the tension between diversity and territoriality [10].

Recently, Jimmy Wales, co-founder of Wikipedia, admitted that the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) has “completely failed” [29] to meet its goal of increasing the number of female participants to 25% by 2015. In February 2011 in response to an article published in The New York Times [5], then Executive Director of WMF, Sue Gardner, asked her Deputy Director Erik Möller to create the Gendergap mailing list, a publicly archived listserv “provided by the Wikimedia Foundation as a communication tool to collectively address the realities of the gender gap” [28]. In September 2014, a male Wikipedian posted the following message to the list: “I think there should be a separate site for the gender gap effort […] where women and men interested in narrowing the gender gap and documenting the existing problems can exchange views in an atmosphere undisturbed by men pretending to be women, men opposed to narrowing the gender gap, men arguing that it's not really proven that the gender gap is a problem.” Even within a dedicated listserv, the topic of gender parity proves to be volatile. Lam et al.[20] confirm this social complexity, noting a “culture that may be resistant to female participation” [20:9].

However, Wikipedia’s gender gap is typically framed as a “woman problem” [8]. It has been attributed to women’s lack of discretionary time [6], sensitivity to conflict and criticism [6], desire to be more social [21], and hesitancy to learn technical skills such as the Wiki mark-up language [11]. In August 2014, Wikimedia Deutschland published a diversity report indicating that, although the picture is complex, “lack of time, technical usability barriers (e.g. navigation, editability), and a variety of sociocultural and communication issues (style of communication, working atmosphere) can […] definitely be identified as reasons for low female participation in Wikipedia” [4].

Despite the perception of the gender gap as a “woman problem,” women do actively contribute to different language Wikipedias across the world. Women lead local chapters, sustain sister projects, and work for and chair the WMF. Women who have similar edit counts to men are more likely to become administrators [21] and make more sizeable revisions [1] than men do. This note reports early findings that suggest there is something to be learned about the possible cause(s) and consequences of Wikipedia’s gender gap by looking more closely at the experiences of women actively engaged in the community. What are their experiences like? What challenges do they face? How do they persevere? We posit that many women Wikipedians engage in a form of ‘emotion work’ [15], also known as emotional labor, that allows them to maintain their participation even as the circumstances in which they engage prove challenging, if not caustic.

I’m happy to share a link to the entire note once it’s available. I’m also happy to collaborate with others re: future research.

Best,
Amanda / Mssemantics

From: Andreas Kolbe <jayen466 <at> gmail.com>
Reply-To: "'Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation of women within Wikimedia projects.'" <gendergap <at> lists.wikimedia.org>
Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 at 5:14 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org>, "'Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation of women within Wikimedia projects.'" <gendergap <at> lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Wikimedia-l] surveys of active female editors?

+1.

Here are some more questions that I would be interested in having answers to:

-- What do women who are presently editing find most demotivating about contributing to Wikipedia? 

-- Have they ever thought of throwing in the towel, and what were the reasons? 

-- Based on past experience, what aspect of Wikimedia/Wikipedia culture would be most likely to cause them to stop editing at some point in the future?

-- What change, if any, would they welcome most to feel good about contributing?

You'd need a male control group for comparative work, to establish whether any of the answers are gender-specific.

Crossposted to gendergap list. (Maybe someone with access to the research mailing list might like to crosspost this thread there as well.)

Andreas



On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 12:22 AM, LB <lightbreather2 <at> gmail.com> wrote:
I want to push a "Like" button on this one. How. Why. I would love to know
the answer to these questions. Also, for those who aren't active - why?


Lightbreather

On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 12:14 PM, James Salsman <jsalsman <at> gmail.com> wrote:

> Are there any surveys of active female editors which have asked how
> they started editing?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request <at> lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org

Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request <at> lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
J Hayes | 20 Jan 18:22 2015
Picon

Woman in a WikiWorld

_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Gmane