I think greg was attacking "drama hounds"
----- Original Message ----
From: Dan Rosenthal <swatjester(a)gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 8, 2008 10:48:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Stalking Article
I have to agree with both Gerard and Greg. While there isn't much that
the WMF can do to actively and immediately stop stalking, we can take
measures to make it less palatable to stalkers. The threat of
foundation-wide bans for stalkers discourages some (and any reduction
is a good one). The foundation can make a strong public statement
against stalking. We certainly won't be able to completely stop it, or
stop it immediately; but to stand by and do nothing while good
contributors are being threatened, harassed, driven from the project,
and having their lives put into shambles is unacceptable customer
service in my book.
-Dan
On Jun 9, 2008, at 1:40 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi,
I think you should take a closer look.. It is way beyond a pissing
contest.
Belittling it as "people taking it way to serious" negates the real
chilling
effect it has.
There are good people, some of the very best in my book, that are
leaving
and have left our projects because they feel threatened, because
they do not
want to be the next road kill, the next statistic. If anything, once
people
start leaving our project because of stalkers, when you can force
your way
by this type of behaviour, there is no longer a NPOV Wikipedia.
When you suggest that it is part of a tit for tat game, you may be
right but
it does not matter. This type of behaviour is not acceptable and the
most
important part that we can to address it is to deal with it in a
professional way. This means serious attention of the issues from
within our
organisation and it may include contacting the appropriate police
organisation and following up / monitoring the further evolution of
this
behaviour.
Suggesting murder, rape, the disfigurement with sulphuric acid is not
acceptable either on wiki or off wiki. It is not only a threat to
the person
involved, it is a threat to us all. This is not a figure of speech,
this is
not freedom of expression, this is the stuff where we have to defend
*our *freedom
of expression. My and your freedom is limited by where the freedom of
someone else starts and so is the freedom of the hoodlums who behave
in this
way.
Thanks,
GerardM
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 7:19 AM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 11:54 PM, Geoffrey Plourde
<geo.plrd(a)yahoo.com>
wrote:
[snip]
RickK left because his family was threatened.
Not to belittle your concern about Cyberstalking... but ... RickK
'left' after being blocked for 3RR in a dispute with SPUI of all
people. (A tangent, I know but I've found that uncorrected
statements
have a terrible tendency of becoming 'the truth'. ... )
At the end of the day no one on Wikipedia or at Wikimedia is
empowered
to stop real staking (can we drop the 'cyber'? It makes it sound like
a video game. If you're being stalked does it matter how it got
started?)... Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a vigilante posse, not
law enforcement.
Stalking which is serious and real.. rather than an extended online
pissing match... stuff that endangers people can't be improved by
anointing a few more users as holy emperors of the Wiki. Take a look
at DavidShankbone's comments on Digg: David's a nice guy and I
have a
lot of sympathy for what he's gone through... But he writes: "The
Wikimedia Foundation needs to publicly support the creation of a
group
of Wikipedia volunteers who have the authority to define harassment
and stalking and take action against it. They will advise the
Stewards
of cases that require a full block across all projects of an IP
range." ... Now seriously, if your problems can be actually
resolved
by smacking the enemy with a ZOMG WMF WIDE BAN, thats not stalking...
it's an internet pissing match between people who are taking
Wikipedia
far too seriously.
Is it a problem that so many good contributors have a problem
avoiding
Internet Drama? Sure... But to call random internet drama stalking
is akin to yelling "rape" every time you get some unwanted
flirtation.
Overuse of the a serious word diminishes its importance and makes it
insufficiently expressive when we really need it.
In fairness, there are a lot of people on English Wikipedia who have
been stalked, attacked, and otherwise mistreated in serious ways.
Yet,
many of those people have also been among those calling for more
impressive ban hammers. I don't think that just because someone is
asking for an internet-drama solution doesn't mean they don't haven't
been harmed in a serious way.
But the ZOMG WMF WIDE BAN can't actually solve their real problems...
but the real stalking is always intermixed with regular Internet
drama, so I guess that internet drama solutions are what get called
for because actually addressing the stalking is much harder, if not
sometimes impossible, and perhaps when you're looking for revenge
you'll take what you can get... ::shrugs:: I can only guess.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/
foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: