The women i know in my part of the professional world
can defend
themselves verbally and otherwise quite as well as the men, and have
at least equal sense in knowing what they are likely to get themselves
in for. I suspect this hold true for politics and business and
reporting and other professions generally.
The need for accepting edits on sensitive subjects generally may
justify our policy for editors. it does not justify it for
administrators.
On 8/27/07, charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com
<charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com> wrote:
"George Herbert" wrote
I have been tilting at the windmill of
pseudonymity here for a while.
Given that X is a conspicuous or several-fingers-in-the-pie admin, it is
more useful to the project if X is happy to give a real name. Press work, presentations,
gladhanding, looking for sponsorship - you name it, for outreach, a real name is what you
want.
On the other hand, voluntary projects which make good use of women as well as men (in
other words, which aren't stupid) are fundamentally more likely to succeed. I take
this as a given. So if a female editor wants to edit pseudonymously, I haven't the
slightest problem. It is a small price to pay.
Charles
-----------------------------------------
Email sent from
www.virginmedia.com/email
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l