Grants:IdeaLab/Teach people time-tested common sense methods for dealing with harassment, and give them tools to anonymize themselves and limit abusive contact. But don't give Wikipedia mandate to create a safe space.
Tackling this issue in the wrong way will work to destroy the impartiality of wiki, since claims of harassment are often weaponized as political tools and a form of harassment.
As bad as harassment itself. But now its also wiki's fault. Both when it happens and when its stopped. Nobody's happy. Everything become's wiki's fault. And the foundation starts actively being gamed to favour one side in an issue as both race to become more harassed. The only way to deal with the issue is to empower users to remain as anonymous as they'd like, and maybe refuse contact from abusive people.
People learning to have a thicker skin is integral to combating harassment, not creating a safe space. No space can be proofed to the extent the people you're pandering to will demand and if it can, it will require the gutting of wiki's stance on free speech and impartiality.
Project idea[edit]
What is the problem you're trying to solve?[edit]
In the present political atmosphere, there are plenty of examples of ideologies which make claims of harassment as a sort of political tool. To discredit, intimidate and silence people with opinions these ideologies don't agree with.
Often, by the very nature of these ideologies, they define dissent as a form of harassment or personal attack or indirect attack (bigotry).
They manipulate bureaucracy by convincing it that people are not adult enough to handle words. And as a means to stop "harassment", they start on a campaign to enforce more and more limits on speech and behaviour, both through soft approaches (making certain things socially unacceptable, or outside of overton's window) and hard approaches (self-righteous bullying and using people in authority to harass your ideological opponents).
The only reason they are so threatened by simple uncivility, is because they are raised in coddling environments, and as The Atlantic put well in "the Coddling of the American Mind", they are mentally unfit in certain ways. We shouldn't pander to them.
Creating an additional mandate for wikipedia to go after the people that are arbitrarily reported by them for frivolous reasons such as "hurting feelings", "emotional bullying does not allow me to edit wiki" or "has unwelcome opinions which indirectly insult me" is going to create a mess you cannot control.
The fact is that harassment is very rare in the grand scheme of things; all disputes I've seen between people on Wikipedia were two people getting in a fight with each other. In these cases, simply empower users to keep online altercations just that... online. Or even to cease contact with abusive people.
Everything else is already covered under other rules like WP:CIVIL and WP:3RR and more.
But in no case should we allow wikipedia to assume the role of creating a safe space.
What is your solution?[edit]
Do nothing, or only create means for users to distance themselves. Anything else is dangerous.
- A huge amount of actual abusive behaviour happens off-Wikipedia, outside the effect of rules and without any identifier to wiki users. By creating rules to curb harassment, you don't affect harassment, but just create new means of manipulation for those with enough time to make use of it.
- The very passing of a mandate or rules on the form of wiki to control or curb speech, will destroy wiki's fragile reputation and many active contributors will leave in protest. The people pushing for these kinds of limits are well aware and are more than happy to see people who don't want safe spaces leave.
Goals[edit]
Get Involved[edit]
About the idea creator[edit]
Participants[edit]
Endorsements[edit]
Expand your idea[edit]
Would a grant from the Wikimedia Foundation help make your idea happen? You can expand this idea into a grant proposal.