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

[Fred Bauder]

> 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

And while many users often sit in the background and let the aggressive
users like I've outlined above keep on keepin' on

Right there is the coalface. The problem is the facilitators and the
enablers, not the nuts.

Fred