[Gendergap] banned/blocked users - was: Re: washington dc

Fri Oct 7 17:25:06 UTC 2011

Sarah, I have a pretty good idea who you're talking about below. If I am
correct, that user has now been banned from the #wikipedia-en IRC channel
for behavioural reasons. Speak to the chanops of other channels to have this
addressed as well; freenode is well aware of the concerns.

Risker/Anne

On 7 October 2011 12:49, Sarah Stierch <sarah.stierch at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think it just shows another aspect of Wikimedia that I think needs a
> better examination - banning and blocks and activities of those members on
> other projects.  Extended blockings (1 year) and bannings mean that a user
> can't participate on that one project - but they are welcome to participate
> in other projects. I know many folks say "Oh, assume good faith - perhaps
> they'll come back after their block a better, happier, healthier
> contributor!" or "They might be messed up online but they're not offline,"
> (sorry Chris!) but this has not quite been what I have seen. I've seen
> members banned or blocked on en.WP go to have unhealthy and unstable
> relationships with the community on other projects, continue to express rage
> and even at times sociopathic behavior to WMF and editors outside of
> projects, and so forth.
>
> I've had an en.WP user stalk and verbally attack me  off of Wikipedia
> (including sexual harassment on social networking sites) to the point where
> I am seriously afraid that if I see this user show up at WIkimania next year
> or a regional event (he's regional to where I live) I won't know if I'll be
> able to stay. This user currently contributes to other projects that I am
> active on and makes a point to comment only on statements I say (in certain
> arenas), leave comments on my talk page, and continue to try to "get my
> attention" in other manners, including on IRC - where the user talks to
> people I consider friends about me to them in order to convince them that
> I'm not an adequate contributor. As someone who survived an extremely
> abusive relationship, the last thing I want to do is worry about my personal
> safety and the safety of others when attending events, editing or
> contributing, or just "hanging out" online. I didn't know how to deal with
> it when it happened, and I still don't. It's an unsettling experience.
>
> And while the survey I am preparing to wrap up confirms what the editor
> survey said - most (female) users don't have problems with users escalate,
> just under half have. Assuming good faith isn't always possible when anger
> management, mental instability and off wiki or offline experiences just
> solidify that some of these people do have problems. And while many users
> often sit in the background and let the aggressive users like I've outlined
> above keep on keepin' on - they continue to suffer silently, and those who
> speak out actively have to suffer with even stronger and more prominent
> attacks.
>
> Sorry to get so emotional about it, it's just...really frustrating for me..
>
> -Sarah Stierch
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Sydney Poore <sydney.poore at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Risker <risker.wp at gmail.com> 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.I agree that we need to be sensitive in general about how we discuss
>>> these type of issues on a public mailing list. And in this case since one
>>> party to the case is an active participate to this mailing list, we need to
>>> take extra caution that we are not only hearing one side of the story.
>>>
>>
>> That said, I don't think that it is actually a parallel comparison. We
>> don't want users escalating disputes by calling employers because it can
>> have loads of negative repercussions for Wikipedia as well as the person who
>> is reported. But I see no reason that users shouldn't take into
>> consideration whether they support having someone who has been banned on one
>> WMF project in a position of trust in a WMF related organization or another
>> wiki. ArbCom does the same type of thing when it vets users for positions of
>> trust such as checkuser. People take into account an users past history when
>> they vote for steward or WMF Board members. So, I don't have a problem with
>> someone raising a concern about it in this situation.
>>
>> Sydney Poore
>> User:FloNight
>>
>>>
>>> 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>
>>>> 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>
>>>>> orangemike at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Sandra ordonez <<sandratordonez at gmail.com>
>>>>>> 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>Gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>>>  <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap>
>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> *Sandra Ordonez*
>>>>> *Web Astronaut*
>>>>> (503)866-2697
>>>>> @Collaboracion
>>>>>
>>>>> "Helping you rock out in the virtual, collaborative world."
>>>>>
>>>>> * <http://www.collaborativenation.com>www.collaborativenation.com*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>>>>  <Gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org>Gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>>  <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap>
>>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia <http://www.glamwiki.org>
> Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch>
> and
> Sarah Stierch Consulting
> *Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.*
> ------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.sarahstierch.com/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20111007/5b7fcd2d/attachment-0001.htm 