On 02/12/2017 03:38 PM, Risker wrote:
On 12 February 2017 at 17:22, Jonathan Cardy <werespielchequers@gmail.com mailto:werespielchequers@gmail.com> wrote:
Clearly not everyone would opt into it if there was an option to do so. Do you object to the idea of developing an option to opt in to email filtering?
Yes, I do, to be honest. The other proposals included in this discussion would be far, far more effective in limiting unwanted or inappropriate emails, without requiring the need to recruit and screen a large number of volunteers to "screen out" inappropriate emails. Honestly, the idea that we'd want people to turn their volunteer time over to screening emails rather than doing everything else that needs to be done is kind of worrisome; current volunteers already have a plethora of activities to participate in, many of which can also assist in harassment reduction, and I'm not sure I'd like to know the psychological profile of people who would volunteer specifically to screen emails. Hiring staff to do this would be outrageous, both from the optics perspective, and more importantly from the cost perspective; the $500,000 grant would probably not even cover a year's worth of salaries.
I agree, and I'd go a little further:
The very idea that separating things into "good guys" and "bad guys" is both unrealistic, and damaging to the objective of creating a healthier social environment. Anyone familiar with Wikimedia's history will recognize that some very damaging things have been said and done by Wikimedia staff and board -- not just by some 9% personae non grata. We might not all agree on the specifics, but I think we can agree that we don't have a cadre of virtuous individuals utterly beyond reproach to unleash on this problem. And even if we did, perhaps there would be better ways to put them to work.
It's not realistic to set the expectation that some parental figure is going to prevent harassment and bullying, and in practice, we don't have any guarantee that such intervention would always make things better, rather than worse.
There are some truly excellent ideas on how to manage email harassment already in this thread, most particularly those that center on the individual users selecting with whom they wish to correspond off-wiki. I think these have a lot of potential to provide support to our volunteers. Do keep in mind, though, that a disproportionate number of users who have been on the receiving end of email harassment are those who are expected to be available via email, and for whom much email would include confidential or private information relating to their volunteer tasks: oversighters, checkusers, Arbcom members, and in some cases administrators. It would be inappropriate for them to use moderated email.
Wise words, important angles to consider.
-Pete