@Beria I'm not clear what point you are trying to prove, other than the 9% of "girls'" voices don't matter. I also find it questionable that you refer to women as girls and don't hesitate ponder why you don't call men boys.
Many women, like myself, get driven off of WP due to frustration with the hierarchy, which does exist. Women are treated with less respect, women are questioned for their motives, women are called prudish if they object to sexualizing images--or they are told their voices are not important because they only comprise 9% of the population.
Why do you think they only comprise 9% then?
My goal on WP is to make it more diverse, and TBH I'm not too into this picture discussion that has gone on for months. But it doesn't mean that it doesn't matter or it isn't an important one, and it doesn't mean that the women who care about it aren't important.
Offense is not the reason here, IMO. Offense barely scratches the surface. I can imagine that many of the people on this list are angry--they are angry that women are being objectified and because women are in the minority on the community and it's an uninviting, sometimes terribly creepy atmosphere, their voices do not matter.
As for badly written? My god that is the worst you can say? In writing terms that is just snide and a low blow. Basically, only someone who can think of no other insult would say this. "Well it's badly written and has spelling mistakes!" Come on, get a fucking life.
Wikipedia is set up so that only people who look for these articles/pictures will know about voting procedures. So of course if there is a vote, the majority would probably be overall positive unless serious canvassing went on to let people who care about the other side know about it so it evens out. Canvassing is set up to prevent this--I believe it's actually a way of biasing the community to serve only the community, and not the readers. Because the readers are--the world. Telling people about the topic is just like how any election goes. I guess unless you are in some sort of fake election where people are led to believe that their votes actually count.
Nowhere did you prove that she lied in that article. You only stated how you disagree with her opinion. Obviously you are not part of this group for the interest of women, otherwise you would care about that 9%'s opinion---so why are you subscribing???
--Maggie
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:49 AM, B?ria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt wrote:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-September/069078.html _____ *B?ria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde ? dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somat?rio de todo o conhecimento humano. ? isso o que estamos a fazer.*
Do you actually know that the 9% I reffer is the study who shows that only 9% of wp users are female, right? Because for your answer I don't quite think you did.
And I'm here because I'm a woman and a wikipedian. I'm sorry if I don't felt under group pression and thinks exactly like you do.
_____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
On 1 October 2011 14:55, Maggie rockerrepro@gmail.com wrote:
@Beria I'm not clear what point you are trying to prove, other than the 9% of "girls'" voices don't matter. I also find it questionable that you refer to women as girls and don't hesitate ponder why you don't call men boys.
Many women, like myself, get driven off of WP due to frustration with the hierarchy, which does exist. Women are treated with less respect, women are questioned for their motives, women are called prudish if they object to sexualizing images--or they are told their voices are not important because they only comprise 9% of the population.
Why do you think they only comprise 9% then?
My goal on WP is to make it more diverse, and TBH I'm not too into this picture discussion that has gone on for months. But it doesn't mean that it doesn't matter or it isn't an important one, and it doesn't mean that the women who care about it aren't important.
Offense is not the reason here, IMO. Offense barely scratches the surface. I can imagine that many of the people on this list are angry--they are angry that women are being objectified and because women are in the minority on the community and it's an uninviting, sometimes terribly creepy atmosphere, their voices do not matter.
As for badly written? My god that is the worst you can say? In writing terms that is just snide and a low blow. Basically, only someone who can think of no other insult would say this. "Well it's badly written and has spelling mistakes!" Come on, get a fucking life.
Wikipedia is set up so that only people who look for these articles/pictures will know about voting procedures. So of course if there is a vote, the majority would probably be overall positive unless serious canvassing went on to let people who care about the other side know about it so it evens out. Canvassing is set up to prevent this--I believe it's actually a way of biasing the community to serve only the community, and not the readers. Because the readers are--the world. Telling people about the topic is just like how any election goes. I guess unless you are in some sort of fake election where people are led to believe that their votes actually count.
Nowhere did you prove that she lied in that article. You only stated how you disagree with her opinion. Obviously you are not part of this group for the interest of women, otherwise you would care about that 9%'s opinion---so why are you subscribing???
--Maggie
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:49 AM, B?ria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt wrote:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-September/069078.html _____ *B?ria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde ? dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somat?rio de todo o conhecimento humano. ? isso o que estamos a fazer.*
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Maggie rockerrepro@gmail.com wrote:
@Beria I'm not clear what point you are trying to prove, other than the 9% of "girls'" voices don't matter. I also find it questionable that you refer to women as girls and don't hesitate ponder why you don't call men boys.
I notice a few people do that. I often find myself re-reading statements to figure out if writers are indeed talking about girls (under the age 18) or grown women.
Offense is not the reason here, IMO. Offense barely scratches the surface. I can imagine that many of the people on this list are angry--they are angry that women are being objectified and because women are in the minority on the community and it's an uninviting, sometimes terribly creepy atmosphere, their voices do not matter.
+1 I'm pissed, to be frank. I also notice there are is still a nice and small amount of women who are really rude also also, especially to other women. Like this is some territorial thing. (I'm also getting that complaint from the survey!)
Come on, get a fucking life.
Maggie - how come you and I haven't met yet? <3
Nowhere did you prove that she lied in that article. You only stated how you disagree with her opinion. Obviously you are not part of this group for the interest of women, otherwise you would care about that 9%'s opinion---so why are you subscribing???
This is a problem we occasionally have in the gender gap room. Why hang out and tell us that you think feminism sucks and that this is one big scheme for special treatment and "affirmative action" and then hang out and wonder why we freak the hell out on you in the IRC room. /facepalm
-Sarah
Ok. I said to myself that I would not answer that personal attack, but seens that you people want to. So lets go answer your "questions" Ms. Maggie (sorry if is offensive not threat you for your last name, but you never said it, so). I do should advice that my politeness will not be present in this mail, so if someone get offended, I'm sorry.
*I'm not clear what point you are trying to prove, other than the 9% of
"girls'" voices don't matter. I also find it questionable that you refer to women as girls and don't hesitate ponder why you don't call men boys.*
First, you need to read my mail again. I never said female voices does not matter. Read again and them come back to talk. And I do reffer man as boys as well, If you knew me a bit more you would know that.
*Many women, like myself, get driven off of WP due to frustration with the
hierarchy, which does exist. Women are treated with less respect, women are questioned for their motives, women are called prudish if they object to sexualizing images--or they are told their voices are not important because they only comprise 9% of the population*.
I'm a woman (or girl) and a Wikipedian for 5 years. I know exactly how we are treated there. And the funny part of it, is that you are complaining that they question your motives, but you have no problems questioning mine. Funny how is easy to do when is not with you right?
*Why do you think they only comprise 9% then?*
Your hero Sue wrote a post about that in November. Read it.
*My goal on WP is to make it more diverse, and TBH I'm not too into this
picture discussion that has gone on for months. But it doesn't mean that it doesn't matter or it isn't an important one, and it doesn't mean that the women who care about it aren't important.
So if you are about make it more diverse you should not be trying to push people away. Remember that girls are only 9% of us, and even the ones who don't agree with you are important.
*Offense is not the reason here, IMO. Offense barely scratches the surface.
I can imagine that many of the people on this list are angry--they are angry that women are being objectified and because women are in the minority on the community and it's an uninviting, sometimes terribly creepy atmosphere, their voices do not matter. As for badly written? My god that is the worst you can say? In writing terms that is just snide and a low blow. Basically, only someone who can think of no other insult would say this. "Well it's badly written and has spelling mistakes!" *
I'm sorry but that is your hero's Sue arguments, not mine. And I DON'T subscribe them.
*Come on, get a fucking life.*
Works both ways. And get a manners teacher who will teach you to not offend other people.
*Wikipedia is set up so that only people who look for these
articles/pictures will know about voting procedures. So of course if there is a vote, the majority would probably be overall positive unless serious canvassing went on to let people who care about the other side know about it so it evens out. Canvassing is set up to prevent this--I believe it's actually a way of biasing the community to serve only the community, and not the readers. Because the readers are--the world. Telling people about the topic is just like how any election goes. I guess unless you are in some sort of fake election where people are led to believe that their votes actually count.*
Canvassing works good when are you people doing to remove images from Wikipedia (I can pull of at least 4 treads in that ML for that from the top of my mind). If you think canvassing solves things, I'm not the one with priorities changed.
*Nowhere did you prove that she lied in that article. You only stated how
you disagree with her opinion.
If you read the mail - I think you didn't - you would say that says in the begin that is a answer to ERIK, not to her. There is no point talk with someone who don't answer you back, and Ms. Garden send me a mail saying that she will not answer any of my mails.
*Obviously you are not part of this group for the interest of women,
Why? Because I don't kiss Sue's ass? To "be part of the group" I need to soulless ass-kisser?
*otherwise you would care about that 9%'s opinion*
Again, go read my mail (or learn English, whatever works for you)
*---so why are you subscribing???*
Because I want to. Is a open list, and I want to be here, If you have a problem with my presence, unsubscribe.
_____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
On 1 October 2011 16:34, Sarah Stierch sarah.stierch@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Maggie rockerrepro@gmail.com wrote:
@Beria I'm not clear what point you are trying to prove, other than the 9% of "girls'" voices don't matter. I also find it questionable that you refer to women as girls and don't hesitate ponder why you don't call men boys.
I notice a few people do that. I often find myself re-reading statements to figure out if writers are indeed talking about girls (under the age 18) or grown women.
Offense is not the reason here, IMO. Offense barely scratches the surface. I can imagine that many of the people on this list are angry--they are angry that women are being objectified and because women are in the minority on the community and it's an uninviting, sometimes terribly creepy atmosphere, their voices do not matter.
+1 I'm pissed, to be frank. I also notice there are is still a nice and small amount of women who are really rude also also, especially to other women. Like this is some territorial thing. (I'm also getting that complaint from the survey!)
Come on, get a fucking life.
Maggie - how come you and I haven't met yet? <3
Nowhere did you prove that she lied in that article. You only stated how you disagree with her opinion. Obviously you are not part of this group for the interest of women, otherwise you would care about that 9%'s opinion---so why are you subscribing???
This is a problem we occasionally have in the gender gap room. Why hang out and tell us that you think feminism sucks and that this is one big scheme for special treatment and "affirmative action" and then hang out and wonder why we freak the hell out on you in the IRC room. /facepalm
-Sarah
-- GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia http://www.glamwiki.org Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch and Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.*
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Maggie, Beria, and all:
I've read through the discussion of Sue's blog post with a mixture of interest (in the substance of the various things that have been said) and concern (about the tenor). I want to address the second of those, the way we choose to communicate with each other.
There are two statements that stand out to me -- things that I feel simply should not be said among people convened around collaboration and equality.
Maggie, you said:
"I'm not clear what point you are trying to prove, other than the 9% of "girls'" voices don't matter."
I can't begin to imagine which of Beria's words made you think that. She didn't say it. But it's the very first sentence of your response to her.
Beria, in a very brief message, you said:
"… the lies Sue told in the post…"
"Lie" is a very strong word. If you're going to make such an accusation (as opposed to "I disagree" or "she is mistaken"), I believe civility demands that you state VERY clearly and concisely, in the same message, precisely what you think the lie is. I did follow your link, and I think I understand your position; but for such a strong statement, I don't believe it's appropriate to expect your readers to go digging for the meaning.
If both of you feel your words above are appropriate to this list, I disagree. Honesty and the validity of women's views are core values that we all share here. Accusations to the contrary are not productive.
-Pete
Béria,
every single post from you to this list or the foundation list was rude, impolite, disrespectful and sometimes openly aggressive. You never explained what the alleged lies are, you called other people ass kissers and so on. Could you please behave in a manner that makes it possible to read this list without distaste?
Regards
Ralph who usually doesnt contribute to this list
Von: gendergap-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:gendergap-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] Im Auftrag von Béria Lima Gesendet: Samstag, 1. Oktober 2011 18:39 An: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects Betreff: Re: [Gendergap] Gendergap Digest, Vol 8, Issue 76
Ok. I said to myself that I would not answer that personal attack, but seens that you people want to. So lets go answer your "questions" Ms. Maggie (sorry if is offensive not threat you for your last name, but you never said it, so). I do should advice that my politeness will not be present in this mail, so if someone get offended, I'm sorry.
I'm not clear what point you are trying to prove, other than the 9% of "girls'" voices don't matter. I also find it questionable that you refer to women as girls and don't hesitate ponder why you don't call men boys.
First, you need to read my mail again. I never said female voices does not matter. Read again and them come back to talk. And I do reffer man as boys as well, If you knew me a bit more you would know that.
Many women, like myself, get driven off of WP due to frustration with the hierarchy, which does exist. Women are treated with less respect, women are questioned for their motives, women are called prudish if they object to sexualizing images--or they are told their voices are not important because they only comprise 9% of the population.
I'm a woman (or girl) and a Wikipedian for 5 years. I know exactly how we are treated there. And the funny part of it, is that you are complaining that they question your motives, but you have no problems questioning mine. Funny how is easy to do when is not with you right?
Why do you think they only comprise 9% then?
Your hero Sue wrote a post about that in November. Read it.
My goal on WP is to make it more diverse, and TBH I'm not too into this picture discussion that has gone on for months. But it doesn't mean that it doesn't matter or it isn't an important one, and it doesn't mean that the women who care about it aren't important.
So if you are about make it more diverse you should not be trying to push people away. Remember that girls are only 9% of us, and even the ones who don't agree with you are important.
Offense is not the reason here, IMO. Offense barely scratches the surface. I can imagine that many of the people on this list are angry--they are angry that women are being objectified and because women are in the minority on the community and it's an uninviting, sometimes terribly creepy atmosphere, their voices do not matter. As for badly written? My god that is the worst you can say? In writing terms that is just snide and a low blow. Basically, only someone who can think of no other insult would say this. "Well it's badly written and has spelling mistakes!"
I'm sorry but that is your hero's Sue arguments, not mine. And I DON'T subscribe them.
Come on, get a fucking life.
Works both ways. And get a manners teacher who will teach you to not offend other people.
Wikipedia is set up so that only people who look for these articles/pictures will know about voting procedures. So of course if there is a vote, the majority would probably be overall positive unless serious canvassing went on to let people who care about the other side know about it so it evens out. Canvassing is set up to prevent this--I believe it's actually a way of biasing the community to serve only the community, and not the readers. Because the readers are--the world. Telling people about the topic is just like how any election goes. I guess unless you are in some sort of fake election where people are led to believe that their votes actually count.
Canvassing works good when are you people doing to remove images from Wikipedia (I can pull of at least 4 treads in that ML for that from the top of my mind). If you think canvassing solves things, I'm not the one with priorities changed.
Nowhere did you prove that she lied in that article. You only stated how you disagree with her opinion.
If you read the mail - I think you didn't - you would say that says in the begin that is a answer to ERIK, not to her. There is no point talk with someone who don't answer you back, and Ms. Garden send me a mail saying that she will not answer any of my mails.
Obviously you are not part of this group for the interest of women,
Why? Because I don't kiss Sue's ass? To "be part of the group" I need to soulless ass-kisser?
otherwise you would care about that 9%'s opinion
Again, go read my mail (or learn English, whatever works for you)
---so why are you subscribing???
Because I want to. Is a open list, and I want to be here, If you have a problem with my presence, unsubscribe.
_____ Béria Lima Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.
On 1 October 2011 16:34, Sarah Stierch sarah.stierch@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Maggie rockerrepro@gmail.com wrote:
@Beria I'm not clear what point you are trying to prove, other than the 9% of "girls'" voices don't matter. I also find it questionable that you refer to women as girls and don't hesitate ponder why you don't call men boys.
I notice a few people do that. I often find myself re-reading statements to figure out if writers are indeed talking about girls (under the age 18) or grown women.
Offense is not the reason here, IMO. Offense barely scratches the surface. I can imagine that many of the people on this list are angry--they are angry that women are being objectified and because women are in the minority on the community and it's an uninviting, sometimes terribly creepy atmosphere, their voices do not matter.
+1 I'm pissed, to be frank. I also notice there are is still a nice and small amount of women who are really rude also also, especially to other women. Like this is some territorial thing. (I'm also getting that complaint from the survey!)
Come on, get a fucking life.
Maggie - how come you and I haven't met yet? <3
Nowhere did you prove that she lied in that article. You only stated how you disagree with her opinion. Obviously you are not part of this group for the interest of women, otherwise you would care about that 9%'s opinion---so why are you subscribing???
This is a problem we occasionally have in the gender gap room. Why hang out and tell us that you think feminism sucks and that this is one big scheme for special treatment and "affirmative action" and then hang out and wonder why we freak the hell out on you in the IRC room. /facepalm
-Sarah
Caps and big letters in internet language means you're screaming. I'm not deaf, and even if I was, I'm - Thanks God - not listening you. So again, as they say in portuguese: "A porta da rua é a serventia da casa" <- use g translate.
Your offenses, like Maggie, means nothing to me. IF you had a bit of education - not to much to ask - we could talk. Since you dont... _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
On 1 October 2011 19:39, Ralph Teckentrup adornix@gmx.net wrote:
Béria,****
every single post from you to this list or the foundation list was rude, impolite, disrespectful and sometimes openly aggressive. You never explained what the alleged “lies” are, you called other people ass kissers and so on. Could you please behave in a manner that makes it possible to read this list without distaste?****
Regards****
Ralph – who usually doesn’t contribute to this list****
*Von:* gendergap-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto: gendergap-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] *Im Auftrag von *Béria Lima *Gesendet:* Samstag, 1. Oktober 2011 18:39 *An:* Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects *Betreff:* Re: [Gendergap] Gendergap Digest, Vol 8, Issue 76****
Ok. I said to myself that I would not answer that personal attack, but seens that you people want to. So lets go answer your "questions" Ms. Maggie (sorry if is offensive not threat you for your last name, but you never said it, so). I do should advice that my politeness will not be present in this mail, so if someone get offended, I'm sorry.****
*I'm not clear what point you are trying to prove, other than the 9% of "girls'" voices don't matter. I also find it questionable that you refer to women as girls and don't hesitate ponder why you don't call men boys.*****
First, you need to read my mail again. I never said female voices does not matter. Read again and them come back to talk. And I do reffer man as boys as well, If you knew me a bit more you would know that.****
*Many women, like myself, get driven off of WP due to frustration with the hierarchy, which does exist. Women are treated with less respect, women are questioned for their motives, women are called prudish if they object to sexualizing images--or they are told their voices are not important because they only comprise 9% of the population*.****
I'm a woman (or girl) and a Wikipedian for 5 years. I know exactly how we are treated there. And the funny part of it, is that you are complaining that they question your motives, but you have no problems questioning mine. Funny how is easy to do when is not with you right?****
*Why do you think they only comprise 9% then?*****
Your hero Sue wrote a post about that in November. Read it.****
*My goal on WP is to make it more diverse, and TBH I'm not too into this picture discussion that has gone on for months. But it doesn't mean that it doesn't matter or it isn't an important one, and it doesn't mean that the women who care about it aren't important.
So if you are about make it more diverse you should not be trying to push people away. Remember that girls are only 9% of us, and even the ones who don't agree with you are important.****
*Offense is not the reason here, IMO. Offense barely scratches the surface. I can imagine that many of the people on this list are angry--they are angry that women are being objectified and because women are in the minority on the community and it's an uninviting, sometimes terribly creepy atmosphere, their voices do not matter. As for badly written? My god that is the worst you can say? In writing terms that is just snide and a low blow. Basically, only someone who can think of no other insult would say this. "Well it's badly written and has spelling mistakes!" *****
I'm sorry but that is your hero's Sue arguments, not mine. And I DON'T subscribe them.****
*Come on, get a fucking life.*****
Works both ways. And get a manners teacher who will teach you to not offend other people.****
*Wikipedia is set up so that only people who look for these articles/pictures will know about voting procedures. So of course if there is a vote, the majority would probably be overall positive unless serious canvassing went on to let people who care about the other side know about it so it evens out. Canvassing is set up to prevent this--I believe it's actually a way of biasing the community to serve only the community, and not the readers. Because the readers are--the world. Telling people about the topic is just like how any election goes. I guess unless you are in some sort of fake election where people are led to believe that their votes actually count.*****
Canvassing works good when are you people doing to remove images from Wikipedia (I can pull of at least 4 treads in that ML for that from the top of my mind). If you think canvassing solves things, I'm not the one with priorities changed.****
*Nowhere did you prove that she lied in that article. You only stated how you disagree with her opinion.*****
If you read the mail - I think you didn't - you would say that says in the begin that is a answer to ERIK, not to her. There is no point talk with someone who don't answer you back, and Ms. Garden send me a mail saying that she will not answer any of my mails.****
*Obviously you are not part of this group for the interest of women, *****
Why? Because I don't kiss Sue's ass? To "be part of the group" I need to soulless ass-kisser? ****
*otherwise you would care about that 9%'s opinion*****
Again, go read my mail (or learn English, whatever works for you)
*---so why are you subscribing???*****
Because I want to. Is a open list, and I want to be here, If you have a problem with my presence, unsubscribe.
*Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
On 1 October 2011 16:34, Sarah Stierch sarah.stierch@gmail.com wrote:***
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Maggie rockerrepro@gmail.com wrote:****
@Beria I'm not clear what point you are trying to prove, other than the 9% of "girls'" voices don't matter. I also find it questionable that you refer to women as girls and don't hesitate ponder why you don't call men boys.
I notice a few people do that. I often find myself re-reading statements to figure out if writers are indeed talking about girls (under the age 18) or grown women.
Offense is not the reason here, IMO. Offense barely scratches the surface. I can imagine that many of the people on this list are angry--they are angry that women are being objectified and because women are in the minority on the community and it's an uninviting, sometimes terribly creepy atmosphere, their voices do not matter. ****
+1 I'm pissed, to be frank. I also notice there are is still a nice and small amount of women who are really rude also also, especially to other women. Like this is some territorial thing. (I'm also getting that complaint from the survey!)
Come on, get a fucking life.****
Maggie - how come you and I haven't met yet? <3
Nowhere did you prove that she lied in that article. You only stated how you disagree with her opinion. Obviously you are not part of this group for the interest of women, otherwise you would care about that 9%'s opinion---so why are you subscribing???****
This is a problem we occasionally have in the gender gap room. Why hang out and tell us that you think feminism sucks and that this is one big scheme for special treatment and "affirmative action" and then hang out and wonder why we freak the hell out on you in the IRC room. /facepalm
-Sarah
-- GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia http://www.glamwiki.org Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch and Sarah Stierch Consulting****
*Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.*
http://www.sarahstierch.com/****
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap****
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Dear Béria,
you seem to answer to me? I did not use caps and big letters. And I honestly don't want to offend anyone. I only wanted to bring to your attention that your posts are perceived by some as quite aggressive in tone. It is not helpful to call someone a liar but refuse to explain where the lies are. It is not helpful to call other people ass lickers and it is not at all helpful to claim that offending others is not bothering you. I appreciate your Wikipedia work but I very much loath your behavior on this list. As Theo wrote you are known as a sociable and competent Wikipedian but it may be that some topics make you a bit impatient. I definitely have the same problem with other topics.
To be fair I have to say that today I read posts from other persons too, which were on the offensive side...
I think this will be my third and last post in this matter because I usually don't like posting when I have nothing constructive to say.
Regards
Ralph
Von: gendergap-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:gendergap-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] Im Auftrag von Béria Lima Gesendet: Samstag, 1. Oktober 2011 21:04 An: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects Betreff: Re: [Gendergap] Gendergap Digest, Vol 8, Issue 76
Caps and big letters in internet language means you're screaming. I'm not deaf, and even if I was, I'm - Thanks God - not listening you. So again, as they say in portuguese: "A porta da rua é a serventia da casa" <- use g translate.
Your offenses, like Maggie, means nothing to me. IF you had a bit of education - not to much to ask - we could talk. Since you dont... _____ Béria Lima Wikimedia Portugal (351) 963 953 042
Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.
On 1 October 2011 19:39, Ralph Teckentrup adornix@gmx.net wrote: Béria, every single post from you to this list or the foundation list was rude, impolite, disrespectful and sometimes openly aggressive. You never explained what the alleged lies are, you called other people ass kissers and so on. Could you please behave in a manner that makes it possible to read this list without distaste? Regards Ralph who usually doesnt contribute to this list Von: gendergap-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:gendergap-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] Im Auftrag von Béria Lima Gesendet: Samstag, 1. Oktober 2011 18:39 An: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects Betreff: Re: [Gendergap] Gendergap Digest, Vol 8, Issue 76 Ok. I said to myself that I would not answer that personal attack, but seens that you people want to. So lets go answer your "questions" Ms. Maggie (sorry if is offensive not threat you for your last name, but you never said it, so). I do should advice that my politeness will not be present in this mail, so if someone get offended, I'm sorry. I'm not clear what point you are trying to prove, other than the 9% of "girls'" voices don't matter. I also find it questionable that you refer to women as girls and don't hesitate ponder why you don't call men boys.
First, you need to read my mail again. I never said female voices does not matter. Read again and them come back to talk. And I do reffer man as boys as well, If you knew me a bit more you would know that. Many women, like myself, get driven off of WP due to frustration with the hierarchy, which does exist. Women are treated with less respect, women are questioned for their motives, women are called prudish if they object to sexualizing images--or they are told their voices are not important because they only comprise 9% of the population.
I'm a woman (or girl) and a Wikipedian for 5 years. I know exactly how we are treated there. And the funny part of it, is that you are complaining that they question your motives, but you have no problems questioning mine. Funny how is easy to do when is not with you right? Why do you think they only comprise 9% then?
Your hero Sue wrote a post about that in November. Read it. My goal on WP is to make it more diverse, and TBH I'm not too into this picture discussion that has gone on for months. But it doesn't mean that it doesn't matter or it isn't an important one, and it doesn't mean that the women who care about it aren't important.
So if you are about make it more diverse you should not be trying to push people away. Remember that girls are only 9% of us, and even the ones who don't agree with you are important. Offense is not the reason here, IMO. Offense barely scratches the surface. I can imagine that many of the people on this list are angry--they are angry that women are being objectified and because women are in the minority on the community and it's an uninviting, sometimes terribly creepy atmosphere, their voices do not matter. As for badly written? My god that is the worst you can say? In writing terms that is just snide and a low blow. Basically, only someone who can think of no other insult would say this. "Well it's badly written and has spelling mistakes!"
I'm sorry but that is your hero's Sue arguments, not mine. And I DON'T subscribe them. Come on, get a fucking life.
Works both ways. And get a manners teacher who will teach you to not offend other people. Wikipedia is set up so that only people who look for these articles/pictures will know about voting procedures. So of course if there is a vote, the majority would probably be overall positive unless serious canvassing went on to let people who care about the other side know about it so it evens out. Canvassing is set up to prevent this--I believe it's actually a way of biasing the community to serve only the community, and not the readers. Because the readers are--the world. Telling people about the topic is just like how any election goes. I guess unless you are in some sort of fake election where people are led to believe that their votes actually count.
Canvassing works good when are you people doing to remove images from Wikipedia (I can pull of at least 4 treads in that ML for that from the top of my mind). If you think canvassing solves things, I'm not the one with priorities changed. Nowhere did you prove that she lied in that article. You only stated how you disagree with her opinion.
If you read the mail - I think you didn't - you would say that says in the begin that is a answer to ERIK, not to her. There is no point talk with someone who don't answer you back, and Ms. Garden send me a mail saying that she will not answer any of my mails. Obviously you are not part of this group for the interest of women,
Why? Because I don't kiss Sue's ass? To "be part of the group" I need to soulless ass-kisser? otherwise you would care about that 9%'s opinion
Again, go read my mail (or learn English, whatever works for you) ---so why are you subscribing???
Because I want to. Is a open list, and I want to be here, If you have a problem with my presence, unsubscribe.
_____ Béria Lima Wikimedia Portugal (351) 963 953 042
Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer. On 1 October 2011 16:34, Sarah Stierch sarah.stierch@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Maggie rockerrepro@gmail.com wrote: @Beria I'm not clear what point you are trying to prove, other than the 9% of "girls'" voices don't matter. I also find it questionable that you refer to women as girls and don't hesitate ponder why you don't call men boys.
I notice a few people do that. I often find myself re-reading statements to figure out if writers are indeed talking about girls (under the age 18) or grown women.
Offense is not the reason here, IMO. Offense barely scratches the surface. I can imagine that many of the people on this list are angry--they are angry that women are being objectified and because women are in the minority on the community and it's an uninviting, sometimes terribly creepy atmosphere, their voices do not matter.
+1 I'm pissed, to be frank. I also notice there are is still a nice and small amount of women who are really rude also also, especially to other women. Like this is some territorial thing. (I'm also getting that complaint from the survey!)
Come on, get a fucking life.
Maggie - how come you and I haven't met yet? <3
Nowhere did you prove that she lied in that article. You only stated how you disagree with her opinion. Obviously you are not part of this group for the interest of women, otherwise you would care about that 9%'s opinion---so why are you subscribing???
This is a problem we occasionally have in the gender gap room. Why hang out and tell us that you think feminism sucks and that this is one big scheme for special treatment and "affirmative action" and then hang out and wonder why we freak the hell out on you in the IRC room. /facepalm
-Sarah
Ralph, PFA the mail as I saw in my pc :)
That was what I saw, and quite frankly, I didn't was in the best mood after be "suggested" to leave the list twice, so I misinterpreted your mail.
And for what is worth, English is not my native language, and no one asked me to show when Sue lied, the only mail I saw was a "Please develop" (or something similar) and I read it as "please develop your ideas about the subject". Therefore, Maggie's and Sarah's mails "forcing" me to give a answer were quite a surprise to me. _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
On 1 October 2011 20:22, Ralph Teckentrup adornix@gmx.net wrote:
Dear Béria,
you seem to answer to me? I did not use caps and big letters. And I honestly don't want to offend anyone. I only wanted to bring to your attention that your posts are perceived by some as quite aggressive in tone. It is not helpful to call someone a liar but refuse to explain where the lies are. It is not helpful to call other people ass lickers and it is not at all helpful to claim that offending others is not bothering you. I appreciate your Wikipedia work but I very much loath your behavior on this list. As Theo wrote you are known as a sociable and competent Wikipedian but it may be that some topics make you a bit impatient. I definitely have the same problem with other topics.
To be fair I have to say that today I read posts from other persons too, which were on the offensive side...
I think this will be my third and last post in this matter because I usually don't like posting when I have nothing constructive to say.
Regards
Ralph
Von: gendergap-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:gendergap-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] Im Auftrag von Béria Lima Gesendet: Samstag, 1. Oktober 2011 21:04 An: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects Betreff: Re: [Gendergap] Gendergap Digest, Vol 8, Issue 76
Caps and big letters in internet language means you're screaming. I'm not deaf, and even if I was, I'm - Thanks God - not listening you. So again, as they say in portuguese: "A porta da rua é a serventia da casa" <- use g translate.
Your offenses, like Maggie, means nothing to me. IF you had a bit of education - not to much to ask - we could talk. Since you dont... _____ Béria Lima Wikimedia Portugal (351) 963 953 042
Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.
On 1 October 2011 19:39, Ralph Teckentrup adornix@gmx.net wrote: Béria,
every single post from you to this list or the foundation list was rude, impolite, disrespectful and sometimes openly aggressive. You never explained what the alleged “lies” are, you called other people ass kissers and so on. Could you please behave in a manner that makes it possible to read this list without distaste?
Regards
Ralph – who usually doesn’t contribute to this list
Von: gendergap-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:gendergap-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] Im Auftrag von Béria Lima Gesendet: Samstag, 1. Oktober 2011 18:39 An: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects Betreff: Re: [Gendergap] Gendergap Digest, Vol 8, Issue 76
Ok. I said to myself that I would not answer that personal attack, but seens that you people want to. So lets go answer your "questions" Ms. Maggie (sorry if is offensive not threat you for your last name, but you never said it, so). I do should advice that my politeness will not be present in this mail, so if someone get offended, I'm sorry. I'm not clear what point you are trying to prove, other than the 9% of "girls'" voices don't matter. I also find it questionable that you refer to women as girls and don't hesitate ponder why you don't call men boys.
First, you need to read my mail again. I never said female voices does not matter. Read again and them come back to talk. And I do reffer man as boys as well, If you knew me a bit more you would know that. Many women, like myself, get driven off of WP due to frustration with the hierarchy, which does exist. Women are treated with less respect, women are questioned for their motives, women are called prudish if they object to sexualizing images--or they are told their voices are not important because they only comprise 9% of the population.
I'm a woman (or girl) and a Wikipedian for 5 years. I know exactly how we are treated there. And the funny part of it, is that you are complaining that they question your motives, but you have no problems questioning mine. Funny how is easy to do when is not with you right? Why do you think they only comprise 9% then?
Your hero Sue wrote a post about that in November. Read it. My goal on WP is to make it more diverse, and TBH I'm not too into this picture discussion that has gone on for months. But it doesn't mean that it doesn't matter or it isn't an important one, and it doesn't mean that the women who care about it aren't important.
So if you are about make it more diverse you should not be trying to push people away. Remember that girls are only 9% of us, and even the ones who don't agree with you are important. Offense is not the reason here, IMO. Offense barely scratches the surface. I can imagine that many of the people on this list are angry--they are angry that women are being objectified and because women are in the minority on the community and it's an uninviting, sometimes terribly creepy atmosphere, their voices do not matter. As for badly written? My god that is the worst you can say? In writing terms that is just snide and a low blow. Basically, only someone who can think of no other insult would say this. "Well it's badly written and has spelling mistakes!"
I'm sorry but that is your hero's Sue arguments, not mine. And I DON'T subscribe them. Come on, get a fucking life.
Works both ways. And get a manners teacher who will teach you to not offend other people. Wikipedia is set up so that only people who look for these articles/pictures will know about voting procedures. So of course if there is a vote, the majority would probably be overall positive unless serious canvassing went on to let people who care about the other side know about it so it evens out. Canvassing is set up to prevent this--I believe it's actually a way of biasing the community to serve only the community, and not the readers. Because the readers are--the world. Telling people about the topic is just like how any election goes. I guess unless you are in some sort of fake election where people are led to believe that their votes actually count.
Canvassing works good when are you people doing to remove images from Wikipedia (I can pull of at least 4 treads in that ML for that from the top of my mind). If you think canvassing solves things, I'm not the one with priorities changed. Nowhere did you prove that she lied in that article. You only stated how you disagree with her opinion.
If you read the mail - I think you didn't - you would say that says in the begin that is a answer to ERIK, not to her. There is no point talk with someone who don't answer you back, and Ms. Garden send me a mail saying that she will not answer any of my mails. Obviously you are not part of this group for the interest of women,
Why? Because I don't kiss Sue's ass? To "be part of the group" I need to soulless ass-kisser? otherwise you would care about that 9%'s opinion
Again, go read my mail (or learn English, whatever works for you)
---so why are you subscribing???
Because I want to. Is a open list, and I want to be here, If you have a problem with my presence, unsubscribe.
Béria Lima Wikimedia Portugal (351) 963 953 042
Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer. On 1 October 2011 16:34, Sarah Stierch sarah.stierch@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Maggie rockerrepro@gmail.com wrote: @Beria I'm not clear what point you are trying to prove, other than the 9% of "girls'" voices don't matter. I also find it questionable that you refer to women as girls and don't hesitate ponder why you don't call men boys.
I notice a few people do that. I often find myself re-reading statements to figure out if writers are indeed talking about girls (under the age 18) or grown women.
Offense is not the reason here, IMO. Offense barely scratches the surface. I can imagine that many of the people on this list are angry--they are angry that women are being objectified and because women are in the minority on the community and it's an uninviting, sometimes terribly creepy atmosphere, their voices do not matter.
+1 I'm pissed, to be frank. I also notice there are is still a nice and small amount of women who are really rude also also, especially to other women. Like this is some territorial thing. (I'm also getting that complaint from the survey!)
Come on, get a fucking life.
Maggie - how come you and I haven't met yet? <3
Nowhere did you prove that she lied in that article. You only stated how you disagree with her opinion. Obviously you are not part of this group for the interest of women, otherwise you would care about that 9%'s opinion---so why are you subscribing???
This is a problem we occasionally have in the gender gap room. Why hang out and tell us that you think feminism sucks and that this is one big scheme for special treatment and "affirmative action" and then hang out and wonder why we freak the hell out on you in the IRC room. /facepalm
-Sarah
-- GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art and Sarah Stierch Consulting Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 10:39, Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt wrote:
Why? Because I don't kiss Sue's ass? To "be part of the group" I need to soulless ass-kisser? [snip]
---so why are you subscribing???
Because I want to. Is a open list, and I want to be here, If you have a problem with my presence, unsubscribe.
Béria Lima Wikimedia Portugal (351) 963 953 042
Beria, to be part of this list no one has to be an "ass-kisser," but we do have to be civil and respectful of each other's (reasonable) positions.
Given that the list exists to discuss why women might feel uncomfortable editing Wikipedia, or posting to its other mailing lists, it would be unfortunate if the same atmosphere were to be transported to this list too.
The onus is on every subscriber to try to make sure this is a place women feel comfortable. Maybe that's an unrealistic goal on a public mailing list, but we can definitely try.
Sarah
*Beria, to be part of this list no one has to be an "ass-kisser," but we do have to be civil and respectful of each other's (reasonable) positions.
So respect mine :D Not to much to ask for. _____ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*
On 1 October 2011 19:46, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 10:39, Béria Lima beria.lima@wikimedia.pt wrote:
Why? Because I don't kiss Sue's ass? To "be part of the group" I need to soulless ass-kisser? [snip]
---so why are you subscribing???
Because I want to. Is a open list, and I want to be here, If you have a problem with my presence, unsubscribe.
Béria Lima Wikimedia Portugal (351) 963 953 042
Beria, to be part of this list no one has to be an "ass-kisser," but we do have to be civil and respectful of each other's (reasonable) positions.
Given that the list exists to discuss why women might feel uncomfortable editing Wikipedia, or posting to its other mailing lists, it would be unfortunate if the same atmosphere were to be transported to this list too.
The onus is on every subscriber to try to make sure this is a place women feel comfortable. Maybe that's an unrealistic goal on a public mailing list, but we can definitely try.
Sarah
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Gender_Studies/Countering...
Just noticed it in case anyone wants to activate; don't know if Feminism wikiproject just the better place or what.
FYI
CM in DC
On Oct 1, 2011, at 6:55 AM, Maggie wrote:
Wikipedia is set up so that only people who look for these articles/pictures will know about voting procedures. So of course if there is a vote, the majority would probably be overall positive unless serious canvassing went on to let people who care about the other side know about it so it evens out. Canvassing is set up to prevent this--I believe it's actually a way of biasing the community to serve only the community, and not the readers. Because the readers are--the world. Telling people about the topic is just like how any election goes. I guess unless you are in some sort of fake election where people are led to believe that their votes actually count.
Maggie, I can relate to the frustration you're expressing. But I'd like to draw a distinction between the Canvassing guideline itself (which I consider a helpful and insightful document, that illuminates important collaborative practices) and the way accusations of Canvassing may be made in certain contexts.
The Canvassing guideline is an important part of our world. If you haven't read it recently, I highly recommend it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CANVASS
It is often quoted by people who, I think, *haven't* read it closely, and used to criticize behavior that is actually constructive. That is a problem, but it's not a problem with the guideline itself.
-Pete
