Guys, not to sound like "queen of the obvious" but this list was startes because the foundation is trying to address this issue......and the lack of women is not only a wiki problem but more a technology problem.....and its not just females...its also a diversity issue......i think we should be grateful that they brought attention to this issue...very few orgs would do so Sandra Ordonez www.collaborativenation.com Tecno-Activism, Community Management, Collaboration Sent from iPhone On Jun 23, 2011, at 10:28 PM, Charlotte J &lt;ravinpa2(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: Hi, Marc, Back in February, you'd responded to Brandon<http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/2011-February/000…ml>: "You are absolutely right, Brandon. This is a systemic problem that has been in existence nearly as long as the Project has. And it has been documented countless times. If this were a technical problem it would have been solved long ago. *If it were a problem that the Foundation felt was affecting** financial contributions to the Project, it would have been a problem given a **high priority to solve.* Instead, the problem involves people. And the powers that be don't seem to know, and are not willing to learn, how to solve it. The attitude seems to be, "If a person leaves, there are plenty to replace them." There seems to be a high regard for content in the encyclopedia, but a very low one for those who create it. This is a recipe for disaster." (emphasis supplied) I agree with you for more reasons than I'll get into right now, but when I first read this -- right after returning from a lunch meeting with my estates attorney to discuss updating my will, as luck would have it -- I couldn't help laughing (ironically), given the context in which Wikipedia had come up during that lunch. My estates attorney is a dear old friend, so one goal for our lunch was to catch up with each other, quite apart from and in addition to the business purpose for our meeting. Consequently, as we ate, I regaled her with the full story of what I'd recently experienced on Wikipedia. My estate is structured to divide the bulk of my funds (such as they are) among non-profits I've given time to over the years (assuming my children are fully educated and launched into adult life by the time I collect my eternal reward). "So," she asked mischievously, after I'd concluded my sorry tale, "just how much are you going to specify as a bequest to the Wikimedia Foundation in the new will?" "Not. *One*. Red. *Cent.*" I replied. I'm only a single former female editor, of course, and a bequest from my estate (such as it will likely be) would only be a tiny drop toward the Wikimedia Foundation's funding goals, but as recent research on gender and philanthropy has revealed,* "Most Women Give More Than Men,"*<http://philanthropy.com/article/Most-Women-Give-More-Than-Me… the Wikimedia Foundation may well be shooting itself in its metaphorical financial foot it it fails to correct the gender imbalance and reduce its offensiveness to women. Ideals have their place, of course, but money purchases new hardware and keeps the servers running. Just something the Foundation folks on the list might want to consider in this context, since I doubt I'm the only woman to have had this reaction, nor that I'll be the last. Best, Charlotte _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap