Am 03.07.2014 21:13 schrieb "Leigh Honeywell" <leigh@hypatia.ca>:

Even if it is an en-wiki only issue, it's having a clear impact on
editor retention and therefore the long-term sustainability of the
project. I think trying to fix that is easy to dismiss as
"micromanagement" but sometimes it turns out that fixing the big
picture /does/ require organizational leadership to address specific
things.

-Leigh

On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Risker <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, here's the issue.  It's never been clear to me whether this is a
> WMF-wide issue or it's an English Wikipedia specific issue.  The
> overwhelming majority of people participating on this list work almost
> exclusively on enwiki, and almost every single experience discussed here
> involves enwiki.
>
> As important as we all know English Wikipedia to be (if nothing else, it's
> the fundraising driver from which the bulk of donations derives), it's also
> only one of hundreds of projects.  There are issues with the Board
> micromanaging a single project directly, and pretty serious issues when the
> Board tries to fix a problem on one project by creating a global policy or
> rule that may actually be counterproductive in other areas.  (And as we can
> see from the obtuseness that Commons shows about such issues as personality
> rights - a major gendergap issue in my mind - even when the Board does try
> to intervene, it's often ineffective.)
>
> Risker/Anne
>
>
>
>
> On 3 July 2014 14:58, Leigh Honeywell <leigh@hypatia.ca> wrote:
>>
>> The more I hear about this, the more I think this is something that
>> WMF needs to address at an institutional level (Board etc.) to resolve
>> these process issues and loopholes. Has this ever been taken "up the
>> chain"?
>>
>> -Leigh
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Ryan Kaldari <rkaldari@wikimedia.org>
>> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Risker <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> You know, I sat on Arbcom for five years, and there were several
>> >> occasions
>> >> when I practically begged those complaining about the behaviour of
>> >> certain
>> >> individuals to initiate a case....but nobody wanted to do that...
>> >
>> >
>> > Well, you know I did actually take one of the worst misogynists on
>> > en.wiki
>> > to ArbCom,[1] and it was such a horrible experience that I decided to
>> > never
>> > do it again. After giving up a month of my life to the case and enduring
>> > constant harassment during the process, all of the evidence that I
>> > painstakingly assembled, presented, and defended was completely ignored
>> > by
>> > ArbCom, and instead he was banned for a year for making a legal threat.
>> > He
>> > is now free to return on the condition that he simply agrees not to make
>> > any
>> > more legal threats. You were actually on that ArbCom panel, Risker, so I
>> > don't really understand your argument that taking incivil editors to
>> > ArbCom
>> > is a good idea. To me it is worse than a waste of effort, it is actually
>> > counterproductive and an invitation to be relentlessly harassed.
>> >
>> > 1.
>> >
>> > https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Alastair_Haines_2&oldid=360884518
>> >
>> > Ryan Kaldari
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Gendergap mailing list
>> > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Leigh Honeywell
>> http://hypatia.ca
>> @hypatiadotca
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>



--
Leigh Honeywell
http://hypatia.ca
@hypatiadotca

_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap