That depends on how you interpret it. No monetary gain was there but they a r e userping someones identity for personal gain.
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device
------ Original message------
From: Nathan
Date: Wed, Dec 10, 2014 12:49 PM
To: Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation of women within Wikimedia projects.;
Subject:Re: [Gendergap] a gender gap meet-up?
No, nothing described below constitutes fraud of any kind.
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Carol Moore dc <carolmooredc(a)verizon.net> wrote:
Let's just call it what it is - internet fraud...
On 12/10/2014 12:02 PM, reguyla(a)gmail.com wrote:
That is joe jobbing.
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device
------ Original message------
From: LB
Date: Wed, Dec 10, 2014 11:58 AM
To: Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation of women within Wikimedia projects.;
Subject:Re: [Gendergap] a gender gap meet-up?
Is there a term (like "joe job") for when someone pretends to be you to get you into trouble? In my case, after I'd already been blocked for a week, an IP address deleted some info that I'd asked to have revdeled. It's possible it was someone who thought they were helping me, but it's also possible - maybe probable - that someone did it maliciously so an admin would think I was dodging my block.
Lightbreather
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Good points carol and i would add that i dont trust the checkuser tool more than 50%. Its easy to fool, hard to read the data and interpret the results. 90% of it is gut instinct and spotting vocal trends and writing style by the user. I have seen first hand that not only is it prone to error, but many in the community give it far more trust than it deserves.
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device
------ Original message------
From: Carol Moore dc
Date: Wed, Dec 10, 2014 1:15 PM
To: Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation of women within Wikimedia projects.;
Subject:Re: [Gendergap] a gender gap meet-up?
On 12/10/2014 12:47 PM, Nathan wrote:
> No, nothing described below constitutes fraud of any kind.
On 12/10/2014 1:01 PM, reguyla(a)gmail.com wrote:
That depends on how you interpret it. No monetary gain was there but they a r e userping someones identity for personal gain.
How do you know?
For example, maybe there are secretly for profit, paid editors
on Wikipedia who feel threatened by more Admin and/or
Foundation scrutiny of the kind that some editors have
been promoting, sometimes for years.
GGTF has too many snoopy, boat rocking editors.
Getting rid of such editors allows them to continue to make
money without pesky snoops. If faking IPs helps discredit those
editors and get them blocked, so they can continue their
secret paid editing, that's fraud.
Or maybe someone who doesn't like GGTF or Lightbreather
paid someone $50 to fake the IP and Lightbreather-like
comments in order to cover their tracks.
Maybe there's someone making a good living faking
3 or 4 IPs a week in some topic area where some
organization wants to discredit some BLPs or
companies or even a whole nation. So they flood
the topic area with socks from phony IPs
and then it's easy to claim new editors are socks
and get rid of them before they can learn
the ropes and deal with POV edits.
I'm sure there are all sorts of more examples
of what might be happening we could come up with.
So don't claim there is no fraud when there could
be fraud going on...
CM
That is joe jobbing.
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device
------ Original message------
From: LB
Date: Wed, Dec 10, 2014 11:58 AM
To: Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation of women within Wikimedia projects.;
Subject:Re: [Gendergap] a gender gap meet-up?
Is there a term (like "joe job") for when someone pretends to be you to get you into trouble? In my case, after I'd already been blocked for a week, an IP address deleted some info that I'd asked to have revdeled. It's possible it was someone who thought they were helping me, but it's also possible - maybe probable - that someone did it maliciously so an admin would think I was dodging my block.
Lightbreather
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 8:57 AM, Fæ <faewik(a)gmail.com> wrote:
See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_job>. This was a targeted attack
on Russavia by someone deliberately pretending to be them.
It's a malicious form of attack intended to have Wikimedians take
action on each other in error in order to cause disruption. With more
sophisticated spoofing going on it is something we all need to stay
aware of.
Fae
On 10 December 2014 at 15:32, Sarah Stierch <sarah.stierch(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Russavia claims he did not start it.
> On Dec 10, 2014 6:09 AM, "reguyla(a)gmail.com" <reguyla(a)gmail.com> wrote:
...
>> Also in re gards to the google group that russavia started. I think that
>> was done in good faith to allow a more interactive venue where people could
>> chat more real time rather than in a moderated email list. So i wouldnt get
>> too upset about the invitations to it even though some folks dont like him.
>> I think hes just trying to be helpful.
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
A few of us live in the dc area as well.
Also in re gards to the google group that russavia started. I think that was done in good faith to allow a more interactive venue where people could chat more real time rather than in a moderated email list. So i wouldnt get too upset about the invitations to it even though some folks dont like him. I think hes just trying to be helpful.
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device
------ Original message------
From: Lennart Guldbrandsson
Date: Mon, Dec 1, 2014 6:08 AM
To: Gendergap;
Subject:Re: [Gendergap] a gender gap meet-up?
I think that's a great idea, and I would love to come, but it's a long way from Sweden :-/
Best wishes,
Lennart Guldbrandsson
070 - 207 80 05
http://www.elementx.se - arbete
http://www.mrchapel.wordpress.com - personlig blogg
Presentation
@aliasHannibal - på Twitter
"Tänk dig en värld där varje människa på den här planeten får fri tillgång till världens samlade kunskap. Det är vårt mål."
Jimmy Wales
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 02:07:51 -0800
From: rkaldari(a)wikimedia.org
To: gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Gendergap] a gender gap meet-up?
Does anyone else feel like it might be time for a gender gap meet-up? I love the mailing list, but it's such a limited (and formal) means of communication. I'm curious what kind of ideas and discussion would come from an in-person get together. I know several of the people on this list are in the Bay Area, so maybe we could put something together in San Francisco or Oakland. Does this sound like an interesting idea to anyone?
Kaldari
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Thanks, i take back everything i said. I have never more wrong. I have since found out that isnt russavia nor do i beli leve that group was started in good faith. I have since remived myself from it.
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device
------ Original message------
From: Sarah Stierch
Date: Wed, Dec 10, 2014 10:32 AM
To: Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation of women within Wikimedia projects.;
Subject:Re: [Gendergap] a gender gap meet-up?
Russavia claims he did not start it.
On Dec 10, 2014 6:09 AM, "reguyla(a)gmail.com" <reguyla(a)gmail.com> wrote:
A few of us live in the dc area as well.
Also in re gards to the google group that russavia started. I think that was done in good faith to allow a more interactive venue where people could chat more real time rather than in a moderated email list. So i wouldnt get too upset about the invitations to it even though some folks dont like him. I think hes just trying to be helpful.
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device
------ Original message------
From: Lennart Guldbrandsson
Date: Mon, Dec 1, 2014 6:08 AM
To: Gendergap;
Subject:Re: [Gendergap] a gender gap meet-up?
I think that's a great idea, and I would love to come, but it's a long way from Sweden :-/
Best wishes,
Lennart Guldbrandsson
070 - 207 80 05
http://www.elementx.se - arbete
http://www.mrchapel.wordpress.com - personlig blogg
Presentation
@aliasHannibal - på Twitter
"Tänk dig en värld där varje människa på den här planeten får fri tillgång till världens samlade kunskap. Det är vårt mål."
Jimmy Wales
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 02:07:51 -0800
From: rkaldari(a)wikimedia.org
To: gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Gendergap] a gender gap meet-up?
Does anyone else feel like it might be time for a gender gap meet-up? I love the mailing list, but it's such a limited (and formal) means of communication. I'm curious what kind of ideas and discussion would come from an in-person get together. I know several of the people on this list are in the Bay Area, so maybe we could put something together in San Francisco or Oakland. Does this sound like an interesting idea to anyone?
Kaldari
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
I totally disagree. Arbco. Decisions have a huge impact on the community even if the majority of the community doesnt see it. Since you mention discretionary sanctions, that is an area where i have seen abused many times. Some admins who like power frequently hide behind ds's and use them as a means to get rid of editor they dont like. They are too broad, too discretionary and too "broadlt construed". It makes them open to abuse in a project where its nearly impossible to remove the tools from even the most abusive admin.
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device
------ Original message------
From: Risker
Date: Wed, Dec 10, 2014 9:43 AM
To: Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation of women within Wikimedia projects.;
Subject:Re: [Gendergap] Arbcom election
On 9 December 2014 at 09:37, Jim Hayes <slowking4(a)gmail.com> wrote:
one take away is how few voters there are.
we have a lot of feminist editathons coming up
should we consider recruiting at events to get new editors over 150 edits,
with a view of block voting in next year's election?
if we organize now, we could run a civility slate of candidates.
Slates are specifically banned from arbcom elections. The majority of candidates who are running this year (and the past several years, for that matter) have stated they were very pro-civility. However, I'm not sure that it makes a difference, since Arbcom decisions and actions have so little impact on the project as a whole. Aside from actions against individual editors (i.e., banning or otherwise sanctioning individuals), pretty much everything else they "decide" has to be implemented by the broader community, and the committee has no way to leverage these things. Better than half the time when Arbcom asks the community to review certain things, it's ignored; discretionary sanctions are entirely based on who is willing to risk the boomerang effect of reporting someone at the DS noticeboard; and there is no apparent willingness of the community to proactively address these issues.
Again, I think you're caught in the trap of believing Arbcom has more power and authority than it really has.
Risker/Anne
see below..
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Veronica Paredes <vaparedes(a)gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 3:26 PM
Subject: FemTechNet NYC Wikipedia Workshop / Edit-a-thon at Barnard, Friday
(12/12) 6-9pm
To: femtechnet(a)umich.edu
Hi FemTechNet,
If you are in the New York City area and interested in learning more about
Wikipedia editing, please consider joining us this Friday evening at
Barnard College for a FemTechNet Wikipedia workshop.
*FemTechNet NYC Wikipedia Workshop and Edit-a-thon*
*with Stephanie Rosen & Veronica Paredes*
Friday, December 12, 2014
6:00-9:00pm
222 Milbank Hall, Barnard College <http://barnard.edu/visit/campus-map>
120th St. and Broadway, NYC
A collaborative event hosted by Barnard College Library, School of Media
Studies at The New School, and the Brooklyn Institute for Social Research.
This workshop will focus on the gender gap in Wikipedia through short
lessons, discussion, and hands-on editing. Please register
<http://goo.gl/forms/48iWSM3sKc> to reserve a space at our event (*all
welcome*!), and see our Wikipedia Meetup page
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/FemTechNet> for information
on remote participation and updates on agenda items. For more information,
contact Stephanie Rosen at ssrosen (at) gmail (dot) com. Remote
participants can attend via BlueJeans video conferencing, please email for
link.
** *Building info: *Wheelchair accessible entrance at 119 St. entrance on
Clermont Ave. / Gender neutral restrooms
<http://www.studentaffairs.columbia.edu/oma/gnmap> available on 1st floor
of Milbank Hall. **
========
*Full links:*
Registration
http://goo.gl/forms/RAKZXssZ5Q
Meetup Page
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/FemTechNet
--
Sarah Stierch
-----
Diverse and engaging consulting for your organization.
www.sarahstierch.com
I totally agree that the arbcom has lost the interest of most of the community and that there used to be more candidates and more voters. I believe this is reflected in a combination of the drop in editors, the drop in admins and in the progressively worse job the arbcom is doing. The take very few cases these days and they always seem to make the worst possible decision that avoids making an actual decision on the issue and leaves both sides losing.
In general, the arbcom has outlived its usefullness and the low votes help reflect that.
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device
------ Original message------
From: Risker
Date: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 11:20 AM
To: Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation of women within Wikimedia projects.;
Subject:Re: [Gendergap] Arbcom election
There have never been anywhere near that many people voting for Arbcom elections; in fact, that's more people than voted in the last Board of Trustees elections for the elected seats, and hugely more than get a "vote" for the chapter/affiliate-selected Board seats.
The fact of the matter is that not that many people actually care about Arbcom, and never really cared. The people who care are usually those who have interacted with the dispute resolution system on multiple occasions. The majority of active administrators participate, for example; but the number of active admins has also nosedived, so we may be seeing the effects of that reflected in the interest in voting, and even in the number and quality of candidates. Back in the earlier days, there were often 30-40 candidates.
Risker/Anne
On 9 December 2014 at 11:08, Carol Moore dc <carolmooredc(a)verizon.net> wrote:
On 12/9/2014 9:08 AM, Risker wrote:
Going to be honest here, I think the more interesting statistic is that there are only 590 voters in an active user base of about 30,000. I think this may reflect a change in the degree of importance the community places on the Arbitration Committee.
They should say the election isn't valid unless, say, 2000 vote, and keep advertising that fact til 2000 vote. Far too easily manipulated this way.
We'll see if the two most problematic candidates because of support for anti-GGTF people are elected.
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Per Fae's message:
>>OOPS,
>>Absolutely correct, I had a programme error. Re-running this gives a
>>more credible set of numbers:
>>Total voted: 590
>>Total identified with gender: 255
>>Male 224
>>Female 31
>>So open males = 38%, open females = 5%. Which indicates that a good
>>*guesstimate* of the number of women voting was 11%.
>>I might also have skipped a voter, I think there should be 591, but I
>>have given up on debugging that one.
>>Fae
I compiled an alphabetical list of voters for the thread on the Arbcom
election at Wikipediocracy yesterday. I also came up with a count of
590 "unscrutinized" voters after filtering out all the redacted
multiple votes.
This represents a drop of at least 36% of participants compared to the
2013 election, probably more like 40% after a certain number of
ballots are disqualified for failing to meet the editing minimums for
vesting of votes established for the election.
That's the big story of the election so far.
I propose that GGTF attempt to (1) poll and (2) personally analyze the
255 "ungendered" voters as to their gender in an attempt to test the
hypothesis that the count of women is underreported in official
statistics.
Those voting in the Arbcom election would seem to make a fine sample
(albeit not truly random) of the 3000 or so core participants at
En-WP.
Tim Davenport
Carrite on WP /// Randy from Boise on WPO
Corvallis, OR
Good luck sarah, im afraid i wouldnt have much positive to say about wikipedia on twitter these days.
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device
------ Original message------
From: Sarah Stierch
Date: Sun, Dec 7, 2014 3:11 PM
To: Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation of women within Wikimedia projects.;
Subject:[Gendergap] We Are Wikipedia
I'm tweeting about wiki and open access stuff via the We Are Wikipedia Twitter account this upcoming week (starting later tonight/tomorrow morning).
You can follow it here:
https://twitter.com/WeAreWikipedia
--
Sarah Stierch
www.sarahstierch.com