So, in other words, you have no evidence at all,
except for some gossip,
that *anyone* is being required to sign NDAs in order to edit Wikipedia.
You have some information that suggests other organizations, completely
separate from Wikipedia,
It's bad enough that women do, indeed, face greater sexual harassment both
societally and on Wikimedia projects, something that is quantified in
various ways even if there is some question about the accuracy of that
quantification. Sesnsationalistic statements such as yours, without any
evidence at all, have a very significant negative impact on the ability to
fight such harassment, especially when they seem so absurd. Simply put,
it's factless allegation, or what certain sectors of the American public
have come to term "fake news". Please retract your statement.
Risker/Anne
On 7 August 2017 at 08:21, Neotarf <neotarf(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I have no way of investigating something I was
not supposed to find out
about in the first place. Given Wikipedia's culture of retaliation against
anyone who speaks out, I am unlikely to find out more, but it did seem
credible. These agreements are becoming more common, for instance here a
female employee wanted to get out of her non-disparagement agreement but
Angel List said no.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0
7/21/technology/silicon-valley-sexual-harassment-non-dispara
gement-agreements.html Also the internal Google gender manifesto that
was just leaked "Until about a week ago, you would have heard very little
from me publicly about this, because (as a fairly senior Googler) my job
would have been to deal with it internally, and confidentiality rules would
have prevented me from saying much in public.But as it happens, (although
this wasn’t the way I was planning on announcing it) I actually recently
left Google..."
https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-
manifesto-1e3773ed1788
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:16 AM, Risker <risker.wp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 6 August 2017 at 23:08, Neotarf <neotarf(a)gmail.com> wrote:
......
Women who do not want to interact on these terms, with individuals who
are quite probably minors, are being silenced. I have heard that
professional women are being recruited for Wikipedia, women whose employers
would ordinarily be expected to protect them from a 'hostile work place',
but they are being required to post their real identities on their talk
pages, along with the names of their employers. and a COI form statement.
They are also required to sign a non-disclosure agreement that prevents
them from revealing any harassment they experience in Wikipedia, or from
even revealing they have been required to sign an NDA. These women will
join Wikipedia, and listen to the pitch and eat the bagels, and Wikipedia
gets to count them as female editors, but very few of them go on to make
that second edit, because it's their professional reputation on the line.
If Wikipedia wants women editors they are going to have to come to
terms with this.
This is a very inflammatory thing to say, Neotarf, and I need to insist
that you show some proof of this. Links to discussions or requirements,
please. This is far too sensationalistic to allow it to sit here without
serious evidence.
Risker/Anne
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit: