On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 9:55 PM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case <dancase@frontiernet.net> wrote:

>A major problem with our dispute-resolution processes is that the person being harassed has >to endure more harassment to draw attention to the problem.

This is, of course, hardly unique to Wikipedia or even online communities in general, I think.

Hi Daniel, the very public nature of it on Wikipedia makes it unusual and very stressful.

>I have long thought the Foundation ought to employ a team of specialists who can take up >those cases when they see them, so that the pursuit of sanctions is not laid at the victim's >door. This is perhaps similar to Sumana's suggestion that communities need dedicated >helpers who will do the emotional labour in conflict situations.

Would there be a good existing example of such a program we could take a look at?

Daniel Case

Sumana talked about the situation at Hacker School: "

If you don’t understand why something you did broke the rules, you don't ask the person who corrected you. You ask a facilitator. You ask someone who’s paid to do that emotional labor, and you don't bring everyone else's work to a screeching halt. This might sound a little bit foreign to some of us right now. Being able to ask someone to stop doing the thing that’s harming everyone else’s work and knowing that it will actually stop and that there’s someone else who’s paid to do that emotional labor who will take care of any conversation that needs to happen.

The idea of having people paid to do this is very attractive for Wikipedia. I think they would have to be professionals with appropriate training, otherwise there's a big risk of making things worse. The Foundation probably has enough of an income to consider this, given the potential impact on the atmosphere and editor retention.

Sarah