"Ryan Wetherell" wrote
I think that nothing can be done, people will and should come and go as they please, regardless of gender.
It's an atmosphere thing. Creating a good atmosphere and working environment is mission-critical, and not just for the participation of women. Everyone should bear this in mind, at all times. It is just not easy to explain, to those who don't find it natural. 'Civility' in the broadest sense is the key.
Charles
----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
On 11/13/06, charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
It's an atmosphere thing. Creating a good atmosphere and working environment is mission-critical, and not just for the participation of women. Everyone should bear this in mind, at all times. It is just not easy to explain, to those who don't find it natural. 'Civility' in the broadest sense is the key.
Charles
Yes, exactly! People sem to have read in a whole lot in what I said that I didn't mean. I'm not saying there should be a "quota" of female editors on the arbcom, that would be insane. I'm just saying that there obviously is a problem here, and that we can't just say "Gender is irrelevant on wikipedia" (like geni did), because frankly, that's just as insane.
Wikipedia is clearly a place where men feels more comfortable than women and that is something that is a BAD thing. And a bunch of guys trying to ignore the issue is just making it worse.
--Oskar
PS. Can we please get a woman to start reading the mailing list? :) This is getting weird with just us boys.
On 11/13/06, Oskar Sigvardsson oskarsigvardsson@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, exactly! People sem to have read in a whole lot in what I said that I didn't mean. I'm not saying there should be a "quota" of female editors on the arbcom, that would be insane. I'm just saying that there obviously is a problem here, and that we can't just say "Gender is irrelevant on wikipedia" (like geni did), because frankly, that's just as insane.
Not really. Particaly when you consider it is likely that there are a number of wikipedians who would probably editify with a gender outside the normal two (Just wait untill some of our more ah sexualy illiberal critics notice http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Furry_Wikipedians)
I don't care how old you are. I don't care what sex you are. I don't care what skin shade you are. I don't care what sexual orientation you are. I don't care about your marital status.
I will care about the langue you speak and sometimes which country you are in when dealing with copyright issues.
Wikipedia is clearly a place where men feels more comfortable than women and that is something that is a BAD thing.
Why?
And a bunch of guys trying to ignore the issue is just making it worse.
Why?
On 11/13/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
Not really. Particaly when you consider it is likely that there are a number of wikipedians who would probably editify with a gender outside the normal two (Just wait untill some of our more ah sexualy illiberal critics notice http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Furry_Wikipedians)
I don't care how old you are. I don't care what sex you are. I don't care what skin shade you are. I don't care what sexual orientation you are. I don't care about your marital status.
I will care about the langue you speak and sometimes which country you are in when dealing with copyright issues.
You can say that all you want (and I feel the same), but if you are denying that gender is a factor in wikipedia, you're deluding yourself.
Wikipedia is clearly a place where men feels more comfortable than women and that is something that is a BAD thing.
Why?
Are you asking why wikipedia is a place where men are more comfortable, if men infact are more comfortable or why it's a bad thing? Sometimes you really need to reply with more than one word, it gets hard to understand.
If you are asking why it's a bad thing, here is a few suggestions: because they comprise more than half of the worlds population, because we need as many diverse views as possible, because having an enviroment where a huge group of people are severly underrepresantated can be damaging to the encyclopedia, ... You can easily make up ten more reasons for yourself, so take your pick.
You're so naive if you think this is irrelevant.
And a bunch of guys trying to ignore the issue is just making it worse.
Why?
Because it's stupid, and stupidity is bad. I don't understand why you are so opposed to the idea that we should work towards a solid representation of both genders on wikipedia. Since when is gender equality a bad thing?
Do you deny that we have a problem with this? Or did the 1:39 ratio not convince you?
--Oskar
On 11/14/06, Oskar Sigvardsson oskarsigvardsson@gmail.com wrote:
You can say that all you want (and I feel the same), but if you are denying that gender is a factor in wikipedia, you're deluding yourself.
I haven't seen it as a factor.
Are you asking why wikipedia is a place where men are more comfortable, if men infact are more comfortable or why it's a bad thing? Sometimes you really need to reply with more than one word, it gets hard to understand.
If you are asking why it's a bad thing, here is a few suggestions: because they comprise more than half of the worlds population, because we need as many diverse views as possible, because having an enviroment where a huge group of people are severly underrepresantated can be damaging to the encyclopedia, ... You can easily make up ten more reasons for yourself, so take your pick.
I wasn't aware that there any female only views.
You're so naive if you think this is irrelevant.
Should be fairly easy to test. Set up a double blind test to see if you can tell if an an article was written by a man or a woman. I don't thinkl you would be able to.
Because it's stupid, and stupidity is bad. I don't understand why you are so opposed to the idea that we should work towards a solid representation of both genders on wikipedia. Since when is gender equality a bad thing?
Gender equality? I wasn't aware that we had people disscriminateing against people on the basis of their sex.