[WikiEN-l] Moving forward

Thu Aug 2 20:59:26 UTC 2007

On 8/2/07, Armed Blowfish <diodontida.armata at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> From Joshua Brady:
> > 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?
>
> Excellent questions.  : )
>
> But which problem?  SlimVirgin's in particular?  Victims and potential
> victims of abuse and harassment in general?  Or identity deception,
> which probably isn't a problem in this case but which some people seem
> to be worried about for some reason?
>
> To help SlimVirgin:
> * Stalkers and other abusers tend to go after the vulnerable, and part
> of vulnerability is social isolation.  By being supportive, we reduce
> the chance that this particular case of stalking will become a violent
> one.  And no, I'm not saying that Daniel Brandt et. al. are the
> violent type, in fact I do not believe they are, but the information
> which may or may not be true has been released to many.  If it's true,
> all it takes is one nut to read that and hunt SlimVirgin down, and
> this could become much worse.  By the time you know the danger you are
> in, it is often too late.  You hear the sound of someone entering
> downstairs... door opening and closing... footsteps... and then the
> voice of the man you fear.  You don't believe you could run out past
> him.  There are no ladders to escape out the window.  You could
> scream, but there's no one around to hear you... and even if there
> was, he's a friend of the neighbours.  All of your friends are busy at
> this time of day, and you know the police won't be sympathetic... and
> even if they did come, they wouldn't come in time.  Instead, you check
> to make sure the door is locked.  It is, but you are afraid that won't
> be enough.  There's no bolt.  All the time you hear footsteps.  He
> arrives, demands entry, starts proclaiming how hurt he feels.  You
> tell him to go away.  He starts picking the lock, all the time
> screaming about how hurtful your refusal to see him is... how he has a
> right to see you, touch you... how much he loves you.  You try to
> barricade the door, but you aren't strong enough to move any of the
> heavy furniture.  Eventually, he successfully picks the lock and
> knocks down the barricade.  He blocks the doorway with his body,
> perhaps around 300lbs heavier than you.  He continues his insane
> banter, even as you yell at him to go away.  Adrenaline has been
> surging through you bloodstream for some time, making you more
> energetic, stronger.  Perhaps you can fight your way past.  You have
> no self defence training, but you manage to jam you knee into his
> groin.  He bends over a bit, but remains firmly blocking the
> doorway... and in a moment he pushes you hard onto the floor, onto the
> toppled remains of your barricade, calling you a 'sick puppy'.  Before
> you can get to your feet, he drags you onto the bed and pins you down
> there, only a bit of thin cloth between his groin and your chest.  He
> keeps up his banter... how hurt he his... how cruel and evil you
> are... how much he loves you... and even starts to cry, all while
> keeping you pinned, all while you keep telling him to go away.  Do not
> make me go on.
> * Providing SlimVirgin with what emotional support we can - letting
> her know she has friends - will hopefully make her feel better.
> Raising awareness of the damaging effects of abuse will hopefully help
> people to do this.
> * Cover up what we can, hoping that less people will see this... you
> never know which one of them might be the type to track her down in
> person.  Discuss privately by e-mail to help people understand why
> their comments are removed.
>
> To help others victims... and especially potential victims.  ('And
> ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.'):
> * If we help SlimVirgin, we teach others that they can and will get
> help, making others less vulnerable.  In addition, tolerace of
> stalkers will only make it safe for them to stalk - the line needs to
> be drawn on this.
> * I already know SlimVirgin and Jayjg will disagree with this, but
> allow editing through Tor.  IP addresses are not the only way to track
> someone down, but don't leave the window unlocked just because it's
> easier for someone to come in through the door.  I trust the
> Checkusers, but there are ways to get someone's IP address without the
> cooperation of Checkusers... eavesdropping on the connection between
> you and Wikipaedia, watching for accidental non-logged-in edits.  Some
> have complained that SlimVirgin left a trace - using Tor is one way to
> help avoid leaving a trace.
> * Be more liberal about oversighting things to protect people.  The
> sooner something goes poof!, the less chance the wrong eyes will see
> it.  And hey, even oversight isn't permanent - it can be undone.
> * Establish better relations with the operators of websites we might
> want to get things removed from.  (This need not be inconsistent with
> not linking to their sites.)  On that note, I'd like to give a public
> thank you to the moderators of the Wikipaedia Review for removing what
> information they have removed, and also for hiding parts of their
> forum from the Googlebot.
>
> As for the identity deception thing, although I am not sure why some
> people think it is relevant in this particular case:
> * The biologists are way ahead of you - try cross-referencing
> 'conventional signal' and 'assessment signal' on Google if you want
> more information... alternatively, you could skip what the biologists
> wrote and read 'Identity and Deception in the Virtual Community' by
> Judith S. Donath.
> http://smg.media.mit.edu/people/Judith/Identity/IdentityDeception.html
>
> Armed Blowfish
>
> On 02/08/07, Joshua Brady <somitho at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 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 <somitho at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 8/2/07, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On 8/2/07, Steve Summit <scs at eskimo.com> 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 at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

by this logic, everyone is at risk of being hunted down, violently attack
and raped simply for revealing their name. what rubbish.