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??