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??