https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/01/27/civility-wikipedia-gamergate/ First, FYI, Foundation comment from Phillipe Beaudette; the comments section is interesting because gamergates don't seem to find it as necessary to point out what their perspective is as those who take an opposite view or push neutrality.
Some interesting comments including:
* Mark Bernstein link to Sarah's comment on GGTF. (Comment: His article is a good outline of what happened. http://www.markbernstein.org/Jan15/Infamous.html And let me say here that I am one individual who wants to see non-governmental/nonviolent education and voluntary social sanctions used to diminish the playing of violent games - and the making of gratuitously violent movies - to zilch. The violent reactions of those gamers who /merely believed/ other women wanted to do so shows how sick the gaming industry is and many gamers have become.)
* "Wikipedia will never have more female editors, because they are all at RationalWiki. " (Comment: I doubt it, though their article on gamergate has lots of interesting dirt on the gamers.)
* "You don’t care about off site harassment. You don’t care about on site harassment. The best part is, you’re going to continue wondering why your volunteers are overwhelmingly male." (Comment: Good one!)
* "And now it’s time for Wikipedia and the ArbCom members to get a taste of what GamerGate supporters have experienced over the last half year, as the biased press, so-called “social justice” warriors, and radical third-wave feminists sling false accusations and slander depicting Wikimedia as anti-Feminist misogynistic avatars of “The Patriarchy” who are problematically silencing the pure and true words of underprivileged minority and feminist editors who are simply fighting against bullying and harassment propagated by those “nasty MRA GG terrorists” (by engaging in bullying, doxxing, and harassment themselves, but it’s all good because that’s “punching up”)." (Comment: Paranoid?)
* "What a load of horse puckey. The Wikipedia only cares about civility when it is convenient; when it has to do with, say, an editor who writes hundreds of articles for them, then civility policy is set aside. The English Wiki Arb Committee sanctioned veteran editors who were keeping the Gamergate topic area free of the rape & death threat style harassment and innuendo that Zoe Quinn, Brianna Wu and others were subjected to." Part of one of Tarc's comments.
* Carol decided to weigh in too:
I thought ArbCom was practicing institutionalized harassment when it just let a few trollish editors totally new to me trash me on the GGTF arbitration before it banned me. (Note, I only used phrase gangbangers for harassers AFTER it was clear ArbCom was going to ban me. And I stand by the phrase.)
It is unbelievable that with the Gamergate Arbitration they have removed editors working to make an article neutral from a flood of off-Wikipedia trolls who evidently also flooded the Arbitration.
It's time for the Foundation to decide if it's on the side of civilization or psychotic chaos. I mean will it really lose that much money - and respect in the tech industry - if it chooses civilization? And will it really lose more trollish editors than the decent ones it will bring back or attract?
Once the tech issues are solved, how about putting a few million bucks into promotion and education to bring such editors in and keep them? How many hundreds of Techies will WMF continue to need??