[Foundation-l] Stalking Article

Mon Jun 9 06:35:05 UTC 2008

Hoi,
I am not aware of the WMF being practically involved in these kind of
issues. As I understand it, the WMF is severely undermanned and
underfinanced and consequently does not get involved in these issues.  When
there would be a strategy on how to deal with issues like the Youtube video,
I expect it can be hightly effective. Because the WMF is a 500 pound gorilla
in its own right :)

The issue is that as time goes by, it becomes more expensive to become
effective at fighting this behaviour that is clearly illegal under many
laws. Once you start to do something about it, there wil be a nearly
constant need for some attention. What I can imagine is that with a tiered
system including arbitration boards involvement it could be manageable.

In my mind there is a need for both action and the containment of that same
action. Involvement of the WMF itself needs to be carefully and judicially
applied.

Thanks,
     GerardM

On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 8:14 AM, Harel Cain <harel.cain at gmail.com> wrote:

> I agree with others here that there is a distinction to be made
> between a wiki-war gone out of control (where the warring parties
> would be long time users, in most cases) and the really nasty cases of
> stalking, threats, libelous publications and the like, usually
> directed by recently arrived (banned?) users at long time users,
> mainly those who blocked them.
>
> I can think of a famous case in hewiki where a very well-known admin
> got into a fight with a certain extremist political group and they
> posted the most horribly, shockingly defamatory video about him in
> response, on Youtube, where I think it exists to that day (mainly
> because apparently Youtube admins don't speak Hebrew and disregarded
> the dozens of complaints about the video).
>
> I don't think the Foundation can do anything practical to handle this
> second type of cases, which are clearly in the legal sphere between
> victim, victimizer (and state persecution), and I agree that taking
> wiki actions against these cases just downplays them into the wiki
> drama (which is too inflated anyway, and which we have to abate, not
> encourage). But there has to be a very clear signal coming from the
> Foundation that these issues are taken very seriously and will not be
> tolerated. It's all on the declaratory sphere, not the practical one.
>
> Harel
>
> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 8:48 AM, Dan Rosenthal <swatjester at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I have to agree with both Gerard and Greg. While there isn't much that
> > the WMF can do to actively and immediately stop stalking, we can take
> > measures to make it less palatable to stalkers. The threat of
> > foundation-wide bans for stalkers discourages some (and any reduction
> > is a good one). The foundation can make a strong public statement
> > against stalking. We certainly won't be able to completely stop it, or
> > stop it immediately; but to stand by and do nothing while good
> > contributors are being threatened, harassed, driven from the project,
> > and having their lives put into shambles is unacceptable customer
> > service in my book.
> >
> > -Dan
> > On Jun 9, 2008, at 1:40 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> >
> >> Hoi,
> >> I think you should take a closer look.. It is way beyond a pissing
> >> contest.
> >> Belittling it as "people taking it way to serious" negates the real
> >> chilling
> >> effect it has.
> >>
> >> There are good people, some of the very best in my book, that are
> >> leaving
> >> and have left our projects because they feel threatened, because
> >> they do not
> >> want to be the next road kill, the next statistic. If anything, once
> >> people
> >> start leaving our project because of stalkers, when you can force
> >> your way
> >> by this type of behaviour, there is no longer a NPOV Wikipedia.
> >>
> >> When you suggest that it is part of a tit for tat game, you may be
> >> right but
> >> it does not matter. This type of behaviour is not acceptable and the
> >> most
> >> important part that we can to address it is to deal with it in a
> >> professional way. This means serious attention of the issues from
> >> within our
> >> organisation and it may include contacting the appropriate police
> >> organisation and following up / monitoring the further evolution of
> >> this
> >> behaviour.
> >>
> >> Suggesting murder, rape, the disfigurement with sulphuric acid is not
> >> acceptable either on wiki or off wiki. It is not only a threat to
> >> the person
> >> involved, it is a threat to us all. This is not a figure of speech,
> >> this is
> >> not freedom of expression, this is the stuff where we have to defend
> >> *our *freedom
> >> of expression. My and your freedom is limited by where the freedom of
> >> someone else starts and so is the freedom of the hoodlums who behave
> >> in this
> >> way.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>     GerardM
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 7:19 AM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 11:54 PM, Geoffrey Plourde
> >>> <geo.plrd at yahoo.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> [snip]
> >>>> RickK left because his family was threatened.
> >>>
> >>> Not to belittle your concern about Cyberstalking... but ... RickK
> >>> 'left' after being blocked for 3RR in a dispute with SPUI of all
> >>> people.  (A tangent, I know but I've found that uncorrected
> >>> statements
> >>> have a terrible tendency of becoming 'the truth'. ... )
> >>>
> >>> At the end of the day no one on Wikipedia or at Wikimedia is
> >>> empowered
> >>> to stop real staking (can we drop the 'cyber'? It makes it sound like
> >>> a video game.  If you're being stalked does it matter how it got
> >>> started?)... Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a vigilante posse, not
> >>> law enforcement.
> >>>
> >>> Stalking which is serious and real..  rather than an extended online
> >>> pissing match... stuff that endangers people can't be improved by
> >>> anointing a few more users as holy emperors of the Wiki.  Take a look
> >>> at DavidShankbone's comments on Digg:  David's a nice guy and I
> >>> have a
> >>> lot of sympathy for what he's gone through...   But he writes:  "The
> >>> Wikimedia Foundation needs to publicly support the creation of a
> >>> group
> >>> of Wikipedia volunteers who have the authority to define harassment
> >>> and stalking and take action against it. They will advise the
> >>> Stewards
> >>> of cases that require a full block across all projects of an IP
> >>> range."  ... Now seriously,  if your problems can be actually
> >>> resolved
> >>> by smacking the enemy with a ZOMG WMF WIDE BAN, thats not stalking...
> >>> it's an internet pissing match between people who are taking
> >>> Wikipedia
> >>> far too seriously.
> >>>
> >>> Is it a problem that so many good contributors have a problem
> >>> avoiding
> >>> Internet Drama?  Sure...   But to call random internet drama stalking
> >>> is akin to yelling "rape" every time you get some unwanted
> >>> flirtation.
> >>> Overuse of the a serious word diminishes its importance and makes it
> >>> insufficiently expressive when we really need it.
> >>>
> >>> In fairness, there are a lot of people on English Wikipedia who have
> >>> been stalked, attacked, and otherwise mistreated in serious ways.
> >>> Yet,
> >>> many of those people have also been among those calling for more
> >>> impressive ban hammers.  I don't think that just because someone is
> >>> asking for an internet-drama solution doesn't mean they don't haven't
> >>> been harmed in a serious way.
> >>>
> >>> But the ZOMG WMF WIDE BAN can't actually solve their real problems...
> >>> but the real stalking is always intermixed with regular Internet
> >>> drama, so I guess that internet drama solutions are what get called
> >>> for because actually addressing the stalking is much harder, if not
> >>> sometimes impossible, and perhaps when you're looking for revenge
> >>> you'll take what you can get... ::shrugs:: I can only guess.
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> foundation-l mailing list
> >>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/
> >>> foundation-l
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> foundation-l mailing list
> >> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>