On Aug 8, 2017, at 5:00 AM, gendergap-request@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:

Send Gendergap mailing list submissions to

  gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit

  https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to

  gendergap-request@lists.wikimedia.org

You can reach the person managing the list at

  gendergap-owner@lists.wikimedia.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific

than "Re: Contents of Gendergap digest..."

Today's Topics:

 1. Re: FYI - GGTF case appeal (Neotarf)

 2. "Selective incivility" (Neotarf)

 3. Re: How to increase the diversity of Wikimedia technical

    contributors and staff? (Fluffernutter wiki)

 4. Re: How to increase the diversity of Wikimedia technical

    contributors and staff? (JJ Marr)

 5. Re: FYI - GGTF case appeal (Risker)

 6. Re: FYI - GGTF case appeal (Neotarf)

 7. Re: How to increase the diversity of Wikimedia    technical

    contributors and staff? (Peter Southwood)

 8. Re: FYI - GGTF case appeal (Risker)

 9. Re: FYI - GGTF case appeal (Robert Fernandez)

10. Re: FYI - GGTF case appeal (Neotarf)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1

Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 08:21:56 -0400

From: Neotarf <neotarf@gmail.com>

To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the

  participation of women within Wikimedia projects."

  <gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>

Subject: Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

Message-ID:

  <CALikuNn1xBxX+YmfZcjfSZutu3=8ncW5=-OM2TBAsR511Hhfxw@mail.gmail.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

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/2017/07/21/technology/silicon-valley-sexual-harassment-non-disparagement-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@gmail.com> wrote:

On 6 August 2017 at 23:08, Neotarf <neotarf@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@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please

visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

-------------- next part --------------

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20170807/36e0f066/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 2

Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 09:16:09 -0400

From: Neotarf <neotarf@gmail.com>

To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the

  participation of women within Wikimedia projects."

  <gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>

Subject: [Gendergap] "Selective incivility"

Message-ID:

  <CALikuNkJGyXXAKaqG=_uFRn3hkxxBbwmj=__ftu1OWQdN0aFmA@mail.gmail.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

This is a body of research going back to at least 2008, usually referred to

in the literature as "Cortina’s theory of selective incivility". It

categorizes types of selective incivility, and has data showing that

selective incivility causes marginalized groups to leave organizations.

"That is, 'generally' uncivil words and deeds make no overt reference to

gender or race (or any other social dimension). Nevertheless, incivility

may sometimes represent a covert manifestation of gender and racial bias

when women and people of color are selectively targeted."

The most frequently cited study is Selective Incivility as Modern

Discrimination in Organizations (2013):

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0149206311418835

-------------- next part --------------

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20170807/bdf8f198/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 3

Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 09:30:32 -0400

From: Fluffernutter wiki <fluffernutter.wiki@gmail.com>

To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the

  participation of women within Wikimedia projects."

  <gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>

Subject: Re: [Gendergap] How to increase the diversity of Wikimedia

  technical contributors and staff?

Message-ID:

  <CA+arXE_g+9yQSyTHJOTEjRWOS9kPMYwhh1Vs38Zyjt6Cd9q04A@mail.gmail.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

This is a topic of much interest to me. Thank you for bringing it up!

First, though, I want to tease apart two of the points you make here, Pine:

increasing technical contributions/participation by non-majority

demographics, and increasing the number of people from non-majority

demographics who get technical degrees or take technical jobs. The two are

related, but not the same, and I would encourage us to think about both

when we think about how to increase our movement's diversity. For instance,

I do not have a STEM degree, and I will almost certainly never be the

person who applies for or wins technical/programming jobs. But I *am *a

person who is interested in making some technical contributions where I

think they could be useful. What you could do to get me to step into that

space is not necessarily what you should do to get another young woman to

take a Computer Science degree.

The rest of this email will focus on my thoughts as someone in the first

group - someone who is not a vocational technical contributor, but has very

tentatively been easing a toe into the waters of technical contributions in

the past year in my spare time.

On an individual level, what I have found extremely helpful on the part of

other people/communities has been to for them to let me *know that there is

a particular person or venue I can approach for help with my

probably-stupid questions when I get stuck, who not only won't judge me

harshly, but will enjoy the experience of helping me learn*. And it's not

enough for that person/venue to exist in a conceptual way - a lot of the

time I need to be explicitly invited to approach them (and maybe even later

reassured that "no, really, approach them! they like helping!"), because

otherwise I will assume what is true of many other technical spaces/people:

they do not welcome those who are not already up to speed.[1]

In the case of the contributions I've been working on thus far, I was lucky

enough to already be acquainted with a community-oriented technical

contributor who enjoys helping people who want to solve technical problems

but who need a little support in figuring out the implementation. *I can't

overstate how much further I have gotten in building my scripts, etc simply

because I know I can reach out to this particular person when I get stuck,

and they will not only help me figure out how to get un-stuck, but they

will give me a digestible explanation for how the un-sticking works*, so

that I am one more step forward for the next time I try. Knowing that the

support is there gives me the guts to try new things without worrying too

much about it being "wasted time" when I hit the limits of my own

knowledge. In my case, my helper happens to be male and someone I already

knew, but I can easily imagine that for many non-majority people coming

into technical contributions who don't already have connections to anyone,

it would be even better if they knew there was someone of a particular

gender, etc that they felt at ease with who was basically wearing a sign

that said "Ask me your stupid questions! I want to help!"

Similarly, I haven't yet attended any technical events like hackathons, but

I'm very curious about them. I like the idea of going in with an idea and

coming out with a thing I built. However, I have the (possibly incorrect?)

impression right now that hackathons are for people who are already capable

of building their thing, not for people who are working on learning to

build their thing, and so I feel that if I were to attend one, I would

either be a bother to everyone else who feels forced to help me when I ask

question after question, or I would simply spend the weekend watching

everyone else capably build things while I sat on the sidelines. *What

would get me over that hill of anxiety and into a hackathon? Basically

being told ahead of time and explicitly that help would not only be

available, but also easily found and enthusiastically given*. Perhaps

something like a program that says "Room C will be staffed all weekend by

experienced technical contributors who are available to help beginners or

those who need another opinion", or a system of "people wearing the orange

lanyards are happy to answer beginner questions; approach them whenever you

need", or a separate track that was a "so you want to build something?

Let's get you started!" introductory workshop. Maybe those things already

exist at hackathons - but if they do, they're not being advertised loudly

enough, because I don't know about them (and I'm pretty well-versed in

movement stuff, so if I don't know about them, it's even less likely that

a, say, random WOC who's interested in joining the movement would be).

Anyway, I'm really glad this issue has been brought up, and I'm looking

forward to reading other people's takes on it!

*[1]* I want to clarify here that when I say people/spaces "do not welcome"

beginners, I don't necessarily mean that they go around wearing signs that

say "no beginners allowed"; more often it is a matter of a person being

easily frustrated by people who don't "get it", or a space being run in a

way that a certain baseline of knowledge is expected in order for one to be

able to participate meaningfully

-Karen/Fluffernutter

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 1:31 AM, Pine W <wiki.pine@gmail.com> wrote:

I read the unofficial Google internal memo that has been the subject of

some controversy, and upon reading it my Wikipedian-trained instincts were

to wonder where the citations were that should, if they were available,

have supported numerous assertions that were made in that memo. I'm not an

expert in diversity -- and I suspect that the author of that memo isn't,

either. In the absence of verifiable and reliable sources, I'm skeptical of

numerous assertions that were made in that document.

This leads me a question that I've had in mind for awhile. How can we

increase the diversity of Wikimedia technical contributors and staff? I'm

referring both to gender diversity and racial diversity (people of African

descent appear to be significantly under-represented).

My unscientific hunch is that what would help is increasing people at

young ages to consider a career in a science, technology, engineering, or

math ("STEM") field, and then continuing to support their interest from

elementary school through college.

(Personal story: I was a poor performer at math in middle school and at

one point I emotionally gave up on the subject, yet I did significantly

better when I reached college and (a) had instructors whose styles were

more compatible with how I learn and (b) had classroom environments that

were more supportive of learning.)

I don't know to what extent Wikimedia should be involved in encouraging

people at early ages to become interested and stay involved with STEM, and

I think that we should ask ourselves if perhaps this is an area in which we

should make some financial and time investments, with the goal of

facilitating development of diverse candidates into engineering and

technical roles for the community as well as organizations like WMDE and

WMF. We probably shouldn't be steering people at young ages to make

long-term commitments to STEM or the Wikimedia ecosystem, but perhaps we

could take some actions that would at least encourage them if they seem to

be interested in STEM to continue their academic growth in those domains. I

don't know if there is data that explains how gender and racial disparities

develop and how to address them, but my hunch is that the earlier that the

issues are addressed, the better.

I don't know what other options to suggest; perhaps people here will have

some ideas. I'd particularly like to invite Victoria to the conversation;

perhaps she can comment sometime in the next several days (probably not for

several hours, since this is still Sunday evening on the US west coast).

Hoping to hear some thoughtful discussion,

Pine

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please

visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

--

Karen Brown

user:Fluffernutter

*Unless otherwise specified, any email sent from this address is in my

volunteer capacity and does not represent the views or wishes of the

Wikimedia Foundation*

-------------- next part --------------

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20170807/235acab2/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 4

Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 10:14:11 -0400

From: JJ Marr <jjmarr@gmail.com>

To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the

  participation of women within Wikimedia projects."

  <gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>

Subject: Re: [Gendergap] How to increase the diversity of Wikimedia

  technical contributors and staff?

Message-ID:

  <CAGwJWMruDDo2YSiZMeNN63NqvshjrzVfHgjkucz1H6P0GpzWkg@mail.gmail.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

I think Wikipedia editors should be a higher priority than technical

contributors. If one looks at most of the STEM community, it appears to be

a systematic problem in underrepresentation. On the other hand, in the

editing environment, there is an underrepresentation of women identifying

editors but at the same time there is a much more gender equal proportion

of women writers in the wider world.

The problem of women editors is a Wikipedia-centric problem, while women

technical staff is one within the wider world and will take a lot more than

just a Wikimedia drive.

On 07 Aug 2017 9:31 AM, "Fluffernutter wiki" <fluffernutter.wiki@gmail.com>

wrote:

This is a topic of much interest to me. Thank you for bringing it up!

First, though, I want to tease apart two of the points you make here,

Pine: increasing technical contributions/participation by non-majority

demographics, and increasing the number of people from non-majority

demographics who get technical degrees or take technical jobs. The two are

related, but not the same, and I would encourage us to think about both

when we think about how to increase our movement's diversity. For instance,

I do not have a STEM degree, and I will almost certainly never be the

person who applies for or wins technical/programming jobs. But I *am *a

person who is interested in making some technical contributions where I

think they could be useful. What you could do to get me to step into that

space is not necessarily what you should do to get another young woman to

take a Computer Science degree.

The rest of this email will focus on my thoughts as someone in the first

group - someone who is not a vocational technical contributor, but has very

tentatively been easing a toe into the waters of technical contributions in

the past year in my spare time.

On an individual level, what I have found extremely helpful on the part of

other people/communities has been to for them to let me *know that there

is a particular person or venue I can approach for help with my

probably-stupid questions when I get stuck, who not only won't judge me

harshly, but will enjoy the experience of helping me learn*. And it's not

enough for that person/venue to exist in a conceptual way - a lot of the

time I need to be explicitly invited to approach them (and maybe even later

reassured that "no, really, approach them! they like helping!"), because

otherwise I will assume what is true of many other technical spaces/people:

they do not welcome those who are not already up to speed.[1]

In the case of the contributions I've been working on thus far, I was

lucky enough to already be acquainted with a community-oriented technical

contributor who enjoys helping people who want to solve technical problems

but who need a little support in figuring out the implementation. *I

can't overstate how much further I have gotten in building my scripts, etc

simply because I know I can reach out to this particular person when I get

stuck, and they will not only help me figure out how to get un-stuck, but

they will give me a digestible explanation for how the un-sticking works*,

so that I am one more step forward for the next time I try. Knowing that

the support is there gives me the guts to try new things without worrying

too much about it being "wasted time" when I hit the limits of my own

knowledge. In my case, my helper happens to be male and someone I already

knew, but I can easily imagine that for many non-majority people coming

into technical contributions who don't already have connections to anyone,

it would be even better if they knew there was someone of a particular

gender, etc that they felt at ease with who was basically wearing a sign

that said "Ask me your stupid questions! I want to help!"

Similarly, I haven't yet attended any technical events like hackathons,

but I'm very curious about them. I like the idea of going in with an idea

and coming out with a thing I built. However, I have the (possibly

incorrect?) impression right now that hackathons are for people who are

already capable of building their thing, not for people who are working on

learning to build their thing, and so I feel that if I were to attend one,

I would either be a bother to everyone else who feels forced to help me

when I ask question after question, or I would simply spend the weekend

watching everyone else capably build things while I sat on the sidelines. *What

would get me over that hill of anxiety and into a hackathon? Basically

being told ahead of time and explicitly that help would not only be

available, but also easily found and enthusiastically given*. Perhaps

something like a program that says "Room C will be staffed all weekend by

experienced technical contributors who are available to help beginners or

those who need another opinion", or a system of "people wearing the orange

lanyards are happy to answer beginner questions; approach them whenever you

need", or a separate track that was a "so you want to build something?

Let's get you started!" introductory workshop. Maybe those things already

exist at hackathons - but if they do, they're not being advertised loudly

enough, because I don't know about them (and I'm pretty well-versed in

movement stuff, so if I don't know about them, it's even less likely that

a, say, random WOC who's interested in joining the movement would be).

Anyway, I'm really glad this issue has been brought up, and I'm looking

forward to reading other people's takes on it!

*[1]* I want to clarify here that when I say people/spaces "do not

welcome" beginners, I don't necessarily mean that they go around wearing

signs that say "no beginners allowed"; more often it is a matter of a

person being easily frustrated by people who don't "get it", or a space

being run in a way that a certain baseline of knowledge is expected in

order for one to be able to participate meaningfully

-Karen/Fluffernutter

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 1:31 AM, Pine W <wiki.pine@gmail.com> wrote:

I read the unofficial Google internal memo that has been the subject of

some controversy, and upon reading it my Wikipedian-trained instincts were

to wonder where the citations were that should, if they were available,

have supported numerous assertions that were made in that memo. I'm not an

expert in diversity -- and I suspect that the author of that memo isn't,

either. In the absence of verifiable and reliable sources, I'm skeptical of

numerous assertions that were made in that document.

This leads me a question that I've had in mind for awhile. How can we

increase the diversity of Wikimedia technical contributors and staff? I'm

referring both to gender diversity and racial diversity (people of African

descent appear to be significantly under-represented).

My unscientific hunch is that what would help is increasing people at

young ages to consider a career in a science, technology, engineering, or

math ("STEM") field, and then continuing to support their interest from

elementary school through college.

(Personal story: I was a poor performer at math in middle school and at

one point I emotionally gave up on the subject, yet I did significantly

better when I reached college and (a) had instructors whose styles were

more compatible with how I learn and (b) had classroom environments that

were more supportive of learning.)

I don't know to what extent Wikimedia should be involved in encouraging

people at early ages to become interested and stay involved with STEM, and

I think that we should ask ourselves if perhaps this is an area in which we

should make some financial and time investments, with the goal of

facilitating development of diverse candidates into engineering and

technical roles for the community as well as organizations like WMDE and

WMF. We probably shouldn't be steering people at young ages to make

long-term commitments to STEM or the Wikimedia ecosystem, but perhaps we

could take some actions that would at least encourage them if they seem to

be interested in STEM to continue their academic growth in those domains. I

don't know if there is data that explains how gender and racial disparities

develop and how to address them, but my hunch is that the earlier that the

issues are addressed, the better.

I don't know what other options to suggest; perhaps people here will have

some ideas. I'd particularly like to invite Victoria to the conversation;

perhaps she can comment sometime in the next several days (probably not for

several hours, since this is still Sunday evening on the US west coast).

Hoping to hear some thoughtful discussion,

Pine

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please

visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

--

Karen Brown

user:Fluffernutter

*Unless otherwise specified, any email sent from this address is in my

volunteer capacity and does not represent the views or wishes of the

Wikimedia Foundation*

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please

visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

-------------- next part --------------

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20170807/c44329b8/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 5

Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 10:14:11 -0400

From: Risker <risker.wp@gmail.com>

To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the

  participation of women within Wikimedia projects."

  <gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>

Subject: Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

Message-ID:

  <CAPXs8yQ-OscKYgyvq3wbNLngbxX2x5uix=O=FPNXCw32ziTPJg@mail.gmail.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

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@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/2017/07/21/technology/silicon-

valley-sexual-harassment-non-disparagement-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@gmail.com> wrote:

On 6 August 2017 at 23:08, Neotarf <neotarf@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@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please

visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please

visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

-------------- next part --------------

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20170807/f0d15126/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 6

Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 14:11:22 -0400

From: Neotarf <neotarf@gmail.com>

To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the

  participation of women within Wikimedia projects."

  <gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>

Subject: Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

Message-ID:

  <CALikuNmgfvZ1aDqGi+S4mZQQ8WX_tEnBokuakSYTTQkUnKB1yw@mail.gmail.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

So we have two former arbitrators on this list, one of whom has offered to

assist in evaluating this thing privately, and who has himself signed such

a non-disparagement agreement, and another who wants to suppress all

discussion of it.  We don't know if she has signed such an agreement.

Publications like the New York Times and Washington Post do print and

evaluate information without naming sources, and it is true they are

sometimes called "fake news" on Twitter, but does not make the information

"factless", or prevent Wikipedia from consider them to be RS.

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Risker <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:

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@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@gmail.com> wrote:

On 6 August 2017 at 23:08, Neotarf <neotarf@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@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please

visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please

visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please

visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

-------------- next part --------------

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20170807/a2f7ce5f/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 7

Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 20:37:17 +0200

From: "Peter Southwood" <peter.southwood@telkomsa.net>

To: "'Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the

  participation of women within Wikimedia projects.'"

  <gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>

Subject: Re: [Gendergap] How to increase the diversity of Wikimedia

  technical contributors and staff?

Message-ID: <009701d30fac$341fb0c0$9c5f1240$@telkomsa.net>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

I agree very much with this.  

Cheers,

P

From: Gendergap [mailto:gendergap-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Fluffernutter wiki

Sent: Monday, 07 August 2017 3:31 PM

To: Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation of women within Wikimedia projects.

Subject: Re: [Gendergap] How to increase the diversity of Wikimedia technical contributors and staff?

This is a topic of much interest to me. Thank you for bringing it up!

First, though, I want to tease apart two of the points you make here, Pine: increasing technical contributions/participation by non-majority demographics, and increasing the number of people from non-majority demographics who get technical degrees or take technical jobs. The two are related, but not the same, and I would encourage us to think about both when we think about how to increase our movement's diversity. For instance, I do not have a STEM degree, and I will almost certainly never be the person who applies for or wins technical/programming jobs. But I am a person who is interested in making some technical contributions where I think they could be useful. What you could do to get me to step into that space is not necessarily what you should do to get another young woman to take a Computer Science degree.

The rest of this email will focus on my thoughts as someone in the first group - someone who is not a vocational technical contributor, but has very tentatively been easing a toe into the waters of technical contributions in the past year in my spare time.

On an individual level, what I have found extremely helpful on the part of other people/communities has been to for them to let me know that there is a particular person or venue I can approach for help with my probably-stupid questions when I get stuck, who not only won't judge me harshly, but will enjoy the experience of helping me learn. And it's not enough for that person/venue to exist in a conceptual way - a lot of the time I need to be explicitly invited to approach them (and maybe even later  reassured that "no, really, approach them! they like helping!"), because otherwise I will assume what is true of many other technical spaces/people: they do not welcome those who are not already up to speed.[1]

In the case of the contributions I've been working on thus far, I was lucky enough to already be acquainted with a community-oriented technical contributor who enjoys helping people who want to solve technical problems but who need a little support in figuring out the implementation. I can't overstate how much further I have gotten in building my scripts, etc simply because I know I can reach out to this particular person when I get stuck, and they will not only help me figure out how to get un-stuck, but they will give me a digestible explanation for how the un-sticking works, so that I am one more step forward for the next time I try. Knowing that the support is there gives me the guts to try new things without worrying too much about it being "wasted time" when I hit the limits of my own knowledge. In my case, my helper happens to be male and someone I already knew, but I can easily imagine that for many non-majority people coming into technical contributions who don't already have connections to anyone, it would be even better if they knew there was someone of a particular gender, etc that they felt at ease with who was basically wearing a sign that said "Ask me your stupid questions! I want to help!"

Similarly, I haven't yet attended any technical events like hackathons, but I'm very curious about them. I like the idea of going in with an idea and coming out with a thing I built. However, I have the (possibly incorrect?) impression right now that hackathons are for people who are already capable of building their thing, not for people who are working on learning to build their thing, and so I feel that if I were to attend one, I would either be a bother to everyone else who feels forced to help me when I ask question after question, or I would simply spend the weekend watching everyone else capably build things while I sat on the sidelines. What would get me over that hill of anxiety and into a hackathon? Basically being told ahead of time and explicitly that help would not only be available, but also easily found and enthusiastically given. Perhaps something like a program that says "Room C will be staffed all weekend by experienced technical contributors who are available to help beginners or those who need another opinion", or a system of "people wearing the orange lanyards are happy to answer beginner questions; approach them whenever you need", or a separate track that was a "so you want to build something? Let's get you started!" introductory workshop. Maybe those things already exist at hackathons - but if they do, they're not being advertised loudly enough, because I don't know about them (and I'm pretty well-versed in movement stuff, so if I don't know about them, it's even less likely that a, say, random WOC who's interested in joining the movement would be).

Anyway, I'm really glad this issue has been brought up, and I'm looking forward to reading other people's takes on it!

[1] I want to clarify here that when I say people/spaces "do not welcome" beginners, I don't necessarily mean that they go around wearing signs that say "no beginners allowed"; more often it is a matter of a person being easily frustrated by people who don't "get it", or a space being run in a way that a certain baseline of knowledge is expected in order for one to be able to participate meaningfully

-Karen/Fluffernutter

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 1:31 AM, Pine W <wiki.pine@gmail.com> wrote:

I read the unofficial Google internal memo that has been the subject of some controversy, and upon reading it my Wikipedian-trained instincts were to wonder where the citations were that should, if they were available, have supported numerous assertions that were made in that memo. I'm not an expert in diversity -- and I suspect that the author of that memo isn't, either. In the absence of verifiable and reliable sources, I'm skeptical of numerous assertions that were made in that document.

This leads me a question that I've had in mind for awhile. How can we increase the diversity of Wikimedia technical contributors and staff? I'm referring both to gender diversity and racial diversity (people of African descent appear to be significantly under-represented).

My unscientific hunch is that what would help is increasing people at young ages to consider a career in a science, technology, engineering, or math ("STEM") field, and then continuing to support their interest from elementary school through college.

(Personal story: I was a poor performer at math in middle school and at one point I emotionally gave up on the subject, yet I did significantly better when I reached college and (a) had instructors whose styles were more compatible with how I learn and (b) had classroom environments that were more supportive of learning.)

I don't know to what extent Wikimedia should be involved in encouraging people at early ages to become interested and stay involved with STEM, and I think that we should ask ourselves if perhaps this is an area in which we should make some financial and time investments, with the goal of facilitating development of diverse candidates into engineering and technical roles for the community as well as organizations like WMDE and WMF. We probably shouldn't be steering people at young ages to make long-term commitments to STEM or the Wikimedia ecosystem, but perhaps we could take some actions that would at least encourage them if they seem to be interested in STEM to continue their academic growth in those domains. I don't know if there is data that explains how gender and racial disparities develop and how to address them, but my hunch is that the earlier that the issues are addressed, the better.

I don't know what other options to suggest; perhaps people here will have some ideas. I'd particularly like to invite Victoria to the conversation; perhaps she can comment sometime in the next several days (probably not for several hours, since this is still Sunday evening on the US west coast).

Hoping to hear some thoughtful discussion,

Pine

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

--

Karen Brown

user:Fluffernutter

Unless otherwise specified, any email sent from this address is in my volunteer capacity and does not represent the views or wishes of the Wikimedia Foundation

<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> Image removed by sender.

Virus-free.  <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> www.avg.com

-------------- next part --------------

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20170807/229046e6/attachment-0001.html>

-------------- next part --------------

A non-text attachment was scrubbed...

Name: image001.jpg

Type: image/jpeg

Size: 350 bytes

Desc: not available

URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20170807/229046e6/attachment-0001.jpg>

------------------------------

Message: 8

Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 14:42:35 -0400

From: Risker <risker.wp@gmail.com>

To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the

  participation of women within Wikimedia projects."

  <gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>

Subject: Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

Message-ID:

  <CAPXs8ySbbq3wyzB4aM6v13EW63OHv62YvY0=--HoTL0an493-g@mail.gmail.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

You're mistaken, Neotarf.  There is no non-disparagement agreement, and

arbitrators have never been required to sign one or even offered the

opportunity to sign one, nor have functionaries or anyone else.  There is a*

confidentiality* agreement that refers to private and confidential

information, which volunteers who have access to such information are

required to sign.[1]  These are two very different things.  I am not

suggesting that discussion be suppressed - I am insisting that you "show us

the money" - give us some evidence that what you are saying is true. If you

can't do that....then you're just gossiping, and that's not what this list

is about.

You are trying to persuade this list that articles in respected journals

about policies of companies that have nothing to do with Wikipedia or

Wikimedia are somehow or other related to some rumour you have heard that

women are being forced to sign non-whatever agreements in order to edit

Wikipedia - a rumour which you have bluntly refused to back up.

At this stage, your allegation that anyone is required to post their real

name, identify their COI, and sign non-disparagement agreements in order to

edit wikipedia is...well, factless, until you can show us some facts.

Risker/Anne

[1] List of people who have current and valid confidentiality agreements:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Access_to_nonpublic_information_policy/Noticeboard

On 7 August 2017 at 14:11, Neotarf <neotarf@gmail.com> wrote:

So we have two former arbitrators on this list, one of whom has offered to

assist in evaluating this thing privately, and who has himself signed such

a non-disparagement agreement, and another who wants to suppress all

discussion of it.  We don't know if she has signed such an agreement.

Publications like the New York Times and Washington Post do print and

evaluate information without naming sources, and it is true they are

sometimes called "fake news" on Twitter, but does not make the information

"factless", or prevent Wikipedia from consider them to be RS.

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Risker <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:

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@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/@yonatanzun

ger/so-about-this-googlers-manifesto-1e3773ed1788

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:16 AM, Risker <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:

On 6 August 2017 at 23:08, Neotarf <neotarf@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@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,

please visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please

visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please

visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please

visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

-------------- next part --------------

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20170807/aa2651c2/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 9

Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 14:59:06 -0400

From: Robert Fernandez <wikigamaliel@gmail.com>

To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the

  participation of women within Wikimedia projects."

  <gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>

Subject: Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

Message-ID:

  <CAMY8yAVGnb8TSNY-4WzTNfi8o7dt-BtKd=wvz_U4DjWhtW_QUQ@mail.gmail.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

No, that's exactly the opposite of what was said.  I did not say I signed a

non-disparagement agreement.  I said I signed the standard WMF

confidentiality agreement.

You can read it here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Confidentiality_

agreement_for_nonpublic_information/  Everyone signs it for even mundane

things.  I first signed it when I processed free database accounts for The

Wikipedia Library and had access to names and email addresses of editors.

You can see there's nothing in it about non-disparagement.  I feel quite

free to disparage any person or institution that I choose.

Given that you are unable to distinguish between a routine confidentiality

agreement and a non-disparagement agreement, or between normal criticism

and the suppression of discussion, I'm pretty confident that these alleged

NPAs have never existed.

The idea that Risker "wants to suppress all discussion" of these alleged

NPAs is nonsense.  She merely pointed out, quite correctly, that spreading

baseless allegations is quite damaging to the very causes you profess to

care about.    Please consider that before you continue to double down on a

baseless allegation.  There are plenty of legitimate criticisms to level at

the Foundation and this community for ineptness and inaction in these areas

without making things up.

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Neotarf <neotarf@gmail.com> wrote:

So we have two former arbitrators on this list, one of whom has offered to

assist in evaluating this thing privately, and who has himself signed such

a non-disparagement agreement, and another who wants to suppress all

discussion of it.  We don't know if she has signed such an agreement.

Publications like the New York Times and Washington Post do print and

evaluate information without naming sources, and it is true they are

sometimes called "fake news" on Twitter, but does not make the information

"factless", or prevent Wikipedia from consider them to be RS.

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Risker <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:

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@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/@yonatanzun

ger/so-about-this-googlers-manifesto-1e3773ed1788

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:16 AM, Risker <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:

On 6 August 2017 at 23:08, Neotarf <neotarf@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@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,

please visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please

visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please

visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please

visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

-------------- next part --------------

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20170807/7b938035/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 10

Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 15:40:39 -0400

From: Neotarf <neotarf@gmail.com>

To: wikigamaliel@gmail.com,  "Addressing gender equity and exploring

  ways to increase the participation of women within Wikimedia

  projects." <gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>

Subject: Re: [Gendergap] FYI - GGTF case appeal

Message-ID:

  <CALikuNkB3oUkZUPY6ywX2e6LB2zNwffgP-Qsv=XRFB8KHv-pmw@mail.gmail.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

There is some association with a private GLAM mailing list.  I could not

find out more, and I cannot give more details without risk of exposing

someone's identity. No idea if it is a NDA, NCA or NPA or something else,

even a misunderstanding, you know how people can be, but why would

something be secret if it does not exist? If you know people in these

institutions maybe you can count for yourself how many of them are

anonymous and how many list their employers on their talk page, and if

there is some uniformity, how that might have come to be.  I am unable to

go further with this issue, but as they say, first do no harm, my loyalty

will be to protecting the careers and reputations of real people, I do

believe this should be the best interest of the WMF as well. It is sad that

when there can be no public discussions of these issues without reprisals,

only the private channels remain.

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Robert Fernandez <wikigamaliel@gmail.com>

wrote:

No, that's exactly the opposite of what was said.  I did not say I signed

a non-disparagement agreement.  I said I signed the standard WMF

confidentiality agreement.

You can read it here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik

i/Confidentiality_agreement_for_nonpublic_information/  Everyone signs it

for even mundane things.  I first signed it when I processed free database

accounts for The Wikipedia Library and had access to names and email

addresses of editors.

You can see there's nothing in it about non-disparagement.  I feel quite

free to disparage any person or institution that I choose.

Given that you are unable to distinguish between a routine confidentiality

agreement and a non-disparagement agreement, or between normal criticism

and the suppression of discussion, I'm pretty confident that these alleged

NPAs have never existed.

The idea that Risker "wants to suppress all discussion" of these alleged

NPAs is nonsense.  She merely pointed out, quite correctly, that spreading

baseless allegations is quite damaging to the very causes you profess to

care about.    Please consider that before you continue to double down on a

baseless allegation.  There are plenty of legitimate criticisms to level at

the Foundation and this community for ineptness and inaction in these areas

without making things up.

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Neotarf <neotarf@gmail.com> wrote:

So we have two former arbitrators on this list, one of whom has offered

to assist in evaluating this thing privately, and who has himself signed

such a non-disparagement agreement, and another who wants to suppress all

discussion of it.  We don't know if she has signed such an agreement.

Publications like the New York Times and Washington Post do print and

evaluate information without naming sources, and it is true they are

sometimes called "fake news" on Twitter, but does not make the information

"factless", or prevent Wikipedia from consider them to be RS.

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Risker <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:

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@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/@yonatanzun

ger/so-about-this-googlers-manifesto-1e3773ed1788

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:16 AM, Risker <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:

On 6 August 2017 at 23:08, Neotarf <neotarf@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@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,

please visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,

please visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please

visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please

visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please

visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

-------------- next part --------------

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20170807/fc3cd249/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

------------------------------

End of Gendergap Digest, Vol 79, Issue 4

****************************************