Re: [Wikimedia-l] : [Wikimedia Announcements] Results of the 2017 WikimediaFoundation Board of Trustees election
16 Oct
2017
16 Oct
'17
6:29 p.m.
Hi Chris,
This is actually a very good point!
I will try to find out with the other members of ec where we stand on this. Stay tuned for
updates.
Thanks and sorry for the delay
On 16 באוקטובר 2017 21:14:33 GMT+03:00, wikimedia-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
Send Wikimedia-l mailing list submissions to
wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
wikimedia-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
wikimedia-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Wikimedia-l digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Women in red (Peter Southwood)
2. Re: Women in red (Robert Fernandez)
3. Re: Women in red (Lodewijk)
4. Re: [Wikimedia Announcements] Results of the 2017 Wikimedia
Foundation Board of Trustees election (Chris Keating)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 19:53:01 +0200
From: "Peter Southwood" <peter.southwood(a)telkomsa.net>
To: "'Wikimedia Mailing List'" <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
Message-ID: <000901d346a7$9e49dd40$dadd97c0$(a)telkomsa.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Why?
-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On
Behalf Of Pax Ahimsa Gethen
Sent: Monday, 16 October 2017 7:21 PM
To: wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a
comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine
people like myself.
I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
people
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
people
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
Also, in case it's not clear from my
forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that
this will be overtaken by bots are well-founded;
that was planned for
in the document outlining the competition, and
editors involved in
this project will be subject to all expectations of normal editors
(including not mass-producing poor-quality content).
As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist.
I believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm
not sure anything he's
said
can be described as an attack on the sender so
much as a valid
criticism of poor wording.
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
<gorillawarfarewikipedia@ gmail.com
wrote:
Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to
this list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with her email address.
"This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some
stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD
everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women
to a higher standard than literally anything
else. The encyclopedia
isn't going to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies
write a bunch of stubs.
And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's
better than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as
I
shouldn't have to remind you, is our
reputation as it currently
stands."
– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
- Pax aka Funcrunch
On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
Is that still going on?
I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on
Wikipedia.
I've helped to encourage events toward that
end, and they've turned
out pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example,
on women involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities
because of them.
But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in
exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration
of quality?" or "Will this effort have
the intended result?" is
sexist. The same question would apply if the proposed articles were
about Russian literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the
question just because of what the subject happens to be.
I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people
sexists. If people really were making sexist
statements, I'd be all
for shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in
this thread.
Todd
On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" <wikigamaliel(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
>
> I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these
> issues. Some people are allowed to make
broad, unsupported,
sweeping
> generalizations about the motives and actions
of others and that's
> considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest
> tones it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and
> apologies are demanded. We've culturally
internalized sexism so
much
> that even the way we talk about sexism is
sexist.
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to <vituzzu.wiki(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>>
>> But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying
>> to contast is, per se, a clear defeat.
>> To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing*
>> about their backgrounds- vilification of
other's opinions is,
>> incidentally, one the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
--
Pax Ahimsa Gethen | pax(a)funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org |
Pronouns: they/them/their
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 13:57:26 -0400
From: Robert Fernandez <wikigamaliel(a)gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
Message-ID:
<CAMY8yAXzYhsdvnuC1+goc42CCPdFoOPjFPCV-W0QVvRez4N7bg(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Is the English Wikipedia the only Wikipedia which has problems with
misogyny and under-representation of female editors and articles? I am
relieved to hear that!
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Jean-Philippe Béland
<jpbeland(a)wikimedia.ca
wrote:
There is so many threads on this list that are
only about English
Wikipedia
like it is the centre of the world... Why other
communities are able
to
> keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
>
> Jean-Philippe Béland
> Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen <
> list-wikimedia(a)funcrunch.org wrote:
>
> > The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether
a
> comment is sexist are women. Not men, and
not non-binary
transmasculine
> people like myself.
>
> I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this
thread:
>
>
> Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of
Emily's/Keilana's
>> message, I endorse it completely and am
glad she made her points.
>>
>> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns
that
this
>> will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for
in the
>> document outlining the competition, and
editors involved in this
project
>> will be subject to all expectations of
normal editors (including
not
>> mass-producing poor-quality content).
>>
>> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
>> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a
sexist. I
>> believe Keegan meant the former, and
I'm not sure anything he's
said can
>> be
>> described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism
of
> poor
> >> wording.
> >>
> >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> >>
> >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
> <gorillawarfarewikipedia@
> >> gmail.com wrote:
>
>>
> >> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through
to
this
>> list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue
with
her
>> email address.
>>
>> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle
some
>> stubs? And do you really, really think
that people won't try to
AFD
>> everything that comes out of this
contest as it is?
>>
>> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about
women
to a
>> higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia
isn't
going
>> to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a
bunch
of
>> stubs.
>>
>> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women?
It's
better
Wikipedia.
> than being seen as being actively hostile to
women, which, as I
shouldn't
>> have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
>>
>> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>>
>
> - Pax aka Funcrunch
>
>
>
> On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
>
>> Is that still going on?
>>
>> I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on
>> I've helped to encourage events
toward that end, and they've
turned out
>> pretty well. We now have quite a few
more articles, for example,
on
women
>> involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of
them.
>>
>> But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money
in
>> exchange for creating large numbers of
articles without
consideration of
>> quality?" or "Will this effort
have the intended result?" is
sexist. The
>> same question would apply if the
proposed articles were about
Russian
>
literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just
because
>> of what the subject happens to be.
>>
>> I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling >> sexists. If people really were making
sexist statements, I'd be
all for
>> shutting that crap down. But I've
seen not one such statement in
this
>> thread.
>>
>> Todd
>>
>> On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez"
<wikigamaliel(a)gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
> >>>
> >>> I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about
these
> > > issues. Some people are allowed to
make broad, unsupported,
sweeping
>>> generalizations about the motives
and actions of others and
that's
>>> considered just fine, but if you
call them out in even the
gentlest
tones
even
> the
> >>> way we talk about sexism is sexist.
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to <vituzzu.wiki(a)gmail.com>
>> it's treated as some horrific
personal attack, and censure and
apologies
>>> are demanded. We've culturally internalized sexism so much that
wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're
trying to
>>>> contast is, per se, a clear
defeat.
>>>> To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know
*nothing*
>>>> about
>>>> their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is,
incidentally,
>>>> one
>>>> the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
>>>>
>>>
> --
> Pax Ahimsa Gethen | pax(a)funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org |
Pronouns:
> they/them/their
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: >
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Jean-Philippe Béland
>
> [image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada
> <https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr>, chapitre
national
soutenant Wikipédia
Vice president — Wikimedia Canada
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en>, national
chapter
supporting Wikipedia
535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec) H2L
2P3,jpbeland(a)wikimedia.ca
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 11:03:32 -0700
From: Lodewijk <lodewijk(a)effeietsanders.org>
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
Message-ID:
<CACf6BeszfvKfnM38V1ugb7zwPOMck+Ow61N9UwAfgM9B5h81sQ(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
I understand from the original email that the venue was chosen based on
the
fact that it was WMF-funded as a project. I am guessing he's trying to
pull
that leverage.
The topic is more generic though: should we support projects that are
considered by some to be a little rough on the edges, or should we only
pick 'safe' projects that will land well with the community. And how
much
of 'be bold' can be applied to projects that operate at a somewhat
larger
scale.
While this particular topic seems enwp specific, its theme isn't.
Lodewijk
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland <
jpbeland(a)wikimedia.ca wrote:
There is so many threads on this list that are
only about English
Wikipedia
like it is the centre of the world... Why other
communities are able
to
> keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
>
> Jean-Philippe Béland
> Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen <
> list-wikimedia(a)funcrunch.org wrote:
>
> > The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether
a
> comment is sexist are women. Not men, and
not non-binary
transmasculine
> people like myself.
>
> I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this
thread:
>
>
> Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of
Emily's/Keilana's
>> message, I endorse it completely and am
glad she made her points.
>>
>> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns
that
this
>> will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for
in the
>> document outlining the competition, and
editors involved in this
project
>> will be subject to all expectations of
normal editors (including
not
>> mass-producing poor-quality content).
>>
>> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
>> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a
sexist. I
>> believe Keegan meant the former, and
I'm not sure anything he's
said can
>> be
>> described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism
of
> poor
> >> wording.
> >>
> >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> >>
> >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
> <gorillawarfarewikipedia@
> >> gmail.com wrote:
>
>>
> >> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through
to
this
>> list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue
with
her
>> email address.
>>
>> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle
some
>> stubs? And do you really, really think
that people won't try to
AFD
>> everything that comes out of this
contest as it is?
>>
>> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about
women
to a
>> higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia
isn't
going
>> to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a
bunch
of
>> stubs.
>>
>> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women?
It's
better
Wikipedia.
> than being seen as being actively hostile to
women, which, as I
shouldn't
>> have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
>>
>> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>>
>
> - Pax aka Funcrunch
>
>
>
> On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
>
>> Is that still going on?
>>
>> I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on
>> I've helped to encourage events
toward that end, and they've
turned out
>> pretty well. We now have quite a few
more articles, for example,
on
women
>> involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of
them.
>>
>> But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money
in
>> exchange for creating large numbers of
articles without
consideration of
>> quality?" or "Will this effort
have the intended result?" is
sexist. The
>> same question would apply if the
proposed articles were about
Russian
>
literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just
because
>> of what the subject happens to be.
>>
>> I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling >> sexists. If people really were making
sexist statements, I'd be
all for
>> shutting that crap down. But I've
seen not one such statement in
this
>> thread.
>>
>> Todd
>>
>> On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez"
<wikigamaliel(a)gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
> >>>
> >>> I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about
these
> > > issues. Some people are allowed to
make broad, unsupported,
sweeping
>>> generalizations about the motives
and actions of others and
that's
>>> considered just fine, but if you
call them out in even the
gentlest
tones
even
> the
> >>> way we talk about sexism is sexist.
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to <vituzzu.wiki(a)gmail.com>
>> it's treated as some horrific
personal attack, and censure and
apologies
>>> are demanded. We've culturally internalized sexism so much that
wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're
trying to
>>>> contast is, per se, a clear
defeat.
>>>> To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know
*nothing*
>>>> about
>>>> their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is,
incidentally,
>>>> one
>>>> the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
>>>>
>>>
> --
> Pax Ahimsa Gethen | pax(a)funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org |
Pronouns:
> they/them/their
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: >
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Jean-Philippe Béland
>
> [image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada
> <https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr>, chapitre
national
soutenant Wikipédia
Vice president — Wikimedia Canada
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en>, national
chapter
supporting Wikipedia
535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec) H2L
2P3,jpbeland(a)wikimedia.ca
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 19:14:29 +0100
From: Chris Keating <chriskeatingwiki(a)gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Results of the
2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election
Message-ID:
<CAFche1quo=Dj08jYbM4OwdyZPD9Zf8jk1r9hCxN1Uaz9_iY7Mw(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Hello all and particularly the Elections Committee!
I just wondered what is happening in terms of post-mortem on the
elections.
There was a call for comments on Meta - is there any kind of active
review
by the Election Committee happening? I know in previous years the EC
has
often made extensive comments to shape future years!
Regards,
Chris
On 21 May 2017 01:33, "matanya moses" <matanya(a)foss.co.il wrote:
Greetings,
The certified results of the 2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of
Trustees
election are now available on Meta-Wiki:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Results
Congratulations to María Sefidari (User:Raystorm), Dariusz Jemielniak
(User:pundit), and James Heilman (User:Doc James) for receiving the
most
community support. Subject to a standard
background check, they will
be
appointed by the Board at their August meeting at
Wikimania.
These results have been certified by the elections committee, the
Wikimedia Foundation staff advisors to the committee, and the Board
of
Trustees.
There were 5,581 votes cast, with 5,120 of those being valid. The
461-vote
difference comes from recast ballots, where
eligible voters recast
ballots
to change their votes, and struck votes, of which
there were 34.
(Some of
the recast votes were also struck.)
Additional information is available on the Wikimedia Blog:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/05/20/board-of-trustees-elections-2017/
More statistics on the elections and a post-mortem from the committee
will
be published in the coming days. In the meantime,
we would appreciate
your
input—what went well for you in this election?
What could we do
better
next time? These reports are crucial to helping
future elections be
even
more successful, and we hope that you will offer
your feedback and
ideas:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
elections/2017/Post_mortem
The committee would like to thank everyone that participated in this
year’s election for helping make it, again, one of the most diverse
and
representative in the movement’s history.
Sincerely,
– Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee
_______________________________________________
Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be
immediately
directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list
of the Wikimedia
community. For more information about Wikimedia-l:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
_______________________________________________
WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
WikimediaAnnounce-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
------------------------------
End of Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 163, Issue 44
******************************************** 
2374
days inactive
2374
days old
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
0 comments
1 participants
participants (1)
-
Matanya