Re: [WikiEN-l] The Second Rape: Victim-Blaming (was Re: Self-sensorship, how far should it go?) - WikiEN-l

2 Aug 2007

Guys/Gals/Others,

This has turned into a free-for-all attack fest on SlimVirgin's
handling of things, and Jayjg's just being on the project. Let's try
to remember not to launch into personal attacks and remain calm, if
you seem like you are going to explode and can't take it anymore;
please back away from the computer, and do not post in the heat of
things.

We have all established:
- SlimVirgin's handling could have been better/worse/should be
oversighted/should not have been oversighted/we need to hire ninjas to
settle this/her MI6 handler is ready to wage a nuclear war James Bond
style.
- Jayjg's time here has come to a close and he should give it up or go
into hiding. Let's all remember we can not by consensus or forcing it
down someones throat, make them leave the project. If and only if
Jayjg himself decides to leave, he will leave. Removal of bits or
asking him to give them up, only gets old. If you want to involuntarly
take tools away from someone, first get a consensus to even make that
possible, then put the specific user up for removal of tools. English
wikipedia does not have a method of doing this currently.
-Other people saying 'we' really mean to say 'I'.
- That online harassment can evolve into a real life danger, something
one person has already confirmed, and something I can attest to as
well.
- Trying to run between terminals at tokyo, with only 30 minutes to do
so, will undoubtly result in a missed flight and forced delay as you
are put on another flight.

Can we try to move on and stop harping on this, and discuss a real
solution for a change? What do we want to do/what are we going to do
about this? What can/will we do to stop this in the future?

-Josh

On 8/2/07, Joshua Brady &lt;somitho(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
...
  On 8/2/07, jayjg &lt;jayjg99(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
  On 8/2/07, Steve Summit &lt;scs(a)eskimo.com&gt;
wrote:
  Jayjg wrote:
  O.K. Explain exactly how *I* was involved in the
"response to
 discussion attempts on-wiki". As far as I can tell, my total
 involvement consisted of overwriting one comment on SV's talk page. 
 Which I (perhaps inappropriately) pointed out.  But if you're not
 involved, then why have you posted 34 messages to this thread? 
 I don't understand the question. If I post to the thread, then I
 suddenly become "involved". Does that mean everyone who posted to this
 thread is now "involved", and should leave Wikipedia?

  Apparently that one action was enough to generate
both huge amounts
 of "drama"... 
 The drama that's present in this thread is indeed symptomatic of
 the problem this thread purports to be about. 
 Which is why, of course, I suggested that we stop talking about it. If
 the drama is actually all in this thread, then people shouldn't have
 started it, and shouldn't be continuing it.

  It's obvious to everyone but you 
 Please don't presume to speak for "everyone"; I've had off-wiki
 communications from others who say they have no idea what this is all
 about.

  but: nobody's talking about you
 just because of that one action.  Your involvement is not due to
 having removed (rather sneakily, I might add) one user's question
 from SlimVirgin's talk page recently, but rather, your consistent
 advocacy of the practice of doing so.  (Among other things.) 
 Huh? I've consistently "advocated" the "practice" of removing
stuff
 from SV's talk page? Where have I done this? And you think I should
 leave Wikipedia because you disagree with opinions that you apparently
 have invented for me?

 I simply am not understanding any of this, as it doesn't appear to
 accord with any reality I am familiar with.

 _______________________________________________
 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