[Gendergap] washington dc

Fri Oct 7 15:57:50 UTC 2011

In answer to Sandra's original question: Yes, I'm deeply concerned about the prospects for Wikimania given the present situation.

However, Anne makes a good point below. There are a couple things it's important to keep in mind though:

(1) Having a healthy Wikimania is something that's in all of our interest; I believe we all have a potential role to play in supporting the local chapter as it does something decidedly international, and
(2) What happened to get this person on the board can't really be called a *decision* of the local group. According to the bylaws, the person in question nominated themselves, I believe without need for a second; there was no disclosure of the person's on-wiki identity (though it is both publicly available and known to this person's immediate peers); and finally, there was no vote at all -- because only 6 people were nominated for 7 seats, all self-nominees were simply seated *without* a decision-making process.

I do think #2 is secondary, but it provides important context for #1. The local organization can do what it wants to; but when there are direct consequences to our broader movement at stake (in the form of Wikimania), I believe that gives us all a strong and legitimate interest in how things go.

-Pete

On Oct 7, 2011, at 8:37 AM, Risker wrote:

> I am saying that you are questioning the decision of an independent body to select a person for membership in the same way that he questioned the WMF for selecting a person he did not consider appropriate. In short, he sought a non-project sanction for on-project activities/concerns. I do not see a difference between that behaviour, and members of this list seeking a non-project sanction (i.e., removing someone from a chapter Board of Directors) for on-project activities/concerns, particularly when the on-project concern was....well, doing exactly what seems to be proposed here.
> 
> Wikimedia chapters are not beholden to one specific project. There are hundreds of people banned or blocked on one WMF project who are active, respected members of other projects;  in fact, even on English Wikipedia, appropriate and valued work in another WMF project or area is usually considered a mitigating factor when a user requests review of a sanction.  
> 
> (For the record, I am a member of the Arbitration Committee that voted to ban the user in question, and did support a ban.)
> 
> Risker/Anne
> 
>  
> 
> On 7 October 2011 11:22, Sandra <sandratordonez at gmail.com> wrote:
> I dont understand what ur trying to express. Can u possibly clarify.
> 
> Are you saying that this person should be allowed to represent the community in an official capacity even though he has been recently banned for inappropriate behavior and breaking community guidelines? 
> 
> I just want to make sure that im understanding your point of view correctly. 
> 
> On Oct 7, 2011, at 10:50 AM, Risker <risker.wp at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> I would recommend considerable caution in discussing this issue on this mailing list. One of the key "harassment" issues was that the now-banned user attempted to contact the WMF about another user whom he believed to beemployed by the WMF under some form of grant or contract. It raises an interesting question that some here would think it appropriate to try to affect that person's position in a Wikimedia chapter because of the English Wikipedia ban; it is parallel to the situation for which the user was banned in the first place.
>> 
>> At least one other party under conditional sanctions in the same case is an active and respected member of this mailing list, and I can respect that it would be difficult for that individual to have this matter dissected here. Please proceed with caution.
>> 
>> 
>> Risker/Anne
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 7 October 2011 09:55, Sandra ordonez <sandratordonez at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Currently banned and I think it wasn't that long ago. 
>> 
>> lets wait till aude responds to see if there is a way this list can help. 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Michael J. Lowrey <orangemike at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Sandra ordonez <sandratordonez at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Essentially, that someone has gotten a leadership position in the D.C.
>> > chapter who has been banned from editing Wikipedia for year for things like
>> > harassing people, disruptive behavior, and editing problems like copyright
>> > violations.
>> 
>> Banned in the past, and done their time; or currently banned? I've
>> worked with ex-cons in the past.
>> 
>> --
>> Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey
>> 
>> "When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food
>> and clothes."
>>      --  Desiderius Erasmus
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Sandra Ordonez
>> Web Astronaut
>> (503)866-2697
>> @Collaboracion
>> 
>> "Helping you rock out in the virtual, collaborative world."
>> 
>> www.collaborativenation.com 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Pete Forsyth
peteforsyth at gmail.com
503-383-9454 mobile

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20111007/c185d9a1/attachment.htm 