On 02/12/2017 03:38 PM, Risker wrote:
On 12 February 2017 at 17:22, Jonathan Cardy
<werespielchequers(a)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