On 5/13/13 9:27 AM, Heather Ford wrote:
On May 13, 2013, at 6:57 AM, phoebe ayers wrote:
You know, it's kind of the
ultimate Wikimedian tempest: arguing over who gets to add users and delete
pages on what is quite possibly the world's most boring wiki[1]...
I would take a stab and stay that it's not about who gets access but about how
people are treated. Sending a mass email to a bunch of people saying that they
no longer have admin access is pretty much like firing them by mass email with
no warning - but it's probably a bit worse than that since the people who do
this work do it because they love Wikipedia and because they care about it, and
it's a slap in the face to be given the pink slip like this. And it is also
rightfully worrying because it isn't the first time it's happened.
I know this because a few years ago, while perusing the WMF wiki, I noticed
that my name had moved from current to past advisory board members. Shocked, I
emailed around to find out what had happened. Apparently I'd been fired and
thanked for my service (another mass email that had apparently gone to my
iCommons email address and which I no longer had access to) but to this day I
have never received any advice on why I was removed, despite asking for
clarification in person and via email on a few occasions. I don't like to whine
and complain [1] and I thought that it was just me, but it made me sad and
upset because I felt like I'd done a lot for Wikimedia, was one of the few
advisory board members who showed up to meetings and tried to get things done,
and to be discarded like that was really upsetting.
This is what this is about. It's about people engaging with one another on a
personal, human level and understanding what it means to be a part of this
thing, this crazy wonderful thing. Maybe it also takes some deeper engagement
in editing these things to understand the implications of what seems to be just
a technical thing like removing rights, placing in different categories but is
heavily political, heavily personal.
And so I'd offer different advice from taking a walk or eating an ice cream or
writing more mass emails to this list. I'd suggest that the people concerned to
write personal emails to the *individuals* who were affected by this and to
engage in a conversation among individuals about why this happened and how
they're going to make it better together. At iCommons, when I was on the
receiving end of similar anger, I had a mantra that I tried to stick to. When
someone sends something that is upsetting, get on the phone with them. Sort it
out one-on-one. This, for me, passionately for me, is what's needed here.
Best,
Heather
[1] here I am whining and complaining but hopefully it is to make a point at
least.
Heather Ford
Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme
www.ethnographymatters.net<http://www.ethnographymatters.net>
@hfordsa on Twitter
http://hblog.org
And for the record, here are the minutes of the discussion which
ultimately resulted in the removal of several advisory board members.
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/November_13-15,_2009#Advisory_Board_Update
I sympathize Heather.
Regarding your proposition... I believe it is a good one.
This said... attempts to implement it may reveal really hard for the
person looking for a phone discussion. Calling anyone at San Francisco
is a real challenge as everything is done to discourage people to call
the office (I understand why :)).
I tried too many times to have good memory of that experience...
(answering machine... talking to me in English... asking me unknown
extension numbers... pouah)
Florence
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
