User talk:Lightbreather/Archive 13

October 2014
Hello, I'm The Determinator. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. The reverted edit can be found [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=628276527 here]. The Determinator p  t  c  00:48, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * My apologies. I saw the word "cocksucker" right underneath your edit, and clicked before I realized its context and that it was not your edit. Again my apologies. The Determinator p  t  c  00:51, 5 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I enjoyed your RfC, but I once got into a lot of trouble for blocking an editor for this comment, which many people felt I misconstrued as personal attack. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:13, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks - and it looks like a PA to me. Lightbreather (talk) 00:49, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Any time
Yes, I too was alive when JFK was assassinated, we can talk any time. I'm just sick and tired of the "you don't act like a woman, you've got to be nicer" (i.e. more passive, a doormat or whatever the F--k.) CMDC pissed me off beyond words with her assumptions at the GGTF, I've got more feminist street cred than most, tired of getting both the "you didn't actually march in the 60s, so you don't have a say amongst the real feminists" and the "you're so old, so step aside and let the young women have their shot" naysayers. Tired of people who attack the easy targets and don't see the conniving trolls who are the real problem. Corbett just insults everyone equally, a misanthrope is not inherently a misogynist. Check out people like Titanium Dragon if you want to see someone who has issues with women and seriously needs a cluebat. Montanabw (talk) 02:12, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to comment on C. or E. here. My feelings about them are mixed... but I hear you.


 * As for "be nicer," I hope you haven't heard that from me, or thought you have. I don't want to tell anyone "be more passive." I'm certainly not passive. And there are so many flavors of feminism, I'm not sure where to put myself... it sounds like you and I are probably about in the same place on that. When I first started out in the IT industry, in the 80s, the sexism was overt. The men who were programmers had posters of playboy bunnies in their offices and I got hit on a lot. (I was young then.) In a way, it was easier to fight because it was physical (as in the case of posters) and face to face (as in getting eyeballed and hit on). This is completely my opinion, and therefore I don't bring it up in "show me the evidence" discussions, but I think virtual offices such as ours here on WP are the new hotbed of sexism - not always overt, sometimes accidental.


 * There are probably guys who worked "back in the day" when men could have bunny posters on their walls and make remarks to co-workers, but who eventually had to give up that kind of nonsense. Some of those guys probably looked inward and decided maybe it was time to change how they looked at women... but some probably said to themselves, "Fuck that," and found other avenues to keep on looking at us as sexual objects first. Then there are the younger ones who have grown up in the era of electronic porn... It creeps me out to think how many guys I work with here probably have porn files on the same computer they're communicating with us on. It's kinda like the old days and the posters, only creepier.


 * Wikipedia has the problem that it has developed over the years as a mostly-male, virtual office. Therefore the male way of communicating and settling conflict has become "the norm." (But it's NOT the norm in a real-life, well-functioning, diverse workplace.) For the majority of men and minority of women who thrive, or at least get by, in such an environment, it (sorta) works. For the majority of women and minority of men who prefer to communicate differently, they edit here in bitterness and misery, if at all. This is all supported by evidence that has been presented in the various forums where the "civility problem" has been discussed. So how do we solve the problem? Do we insist that, since WP was influenced early-on by a mostly-male environment of agonism (as socio-linguist Deborah Tannen calls it), anyone who is miserable editing in such an environment "grow a thick skin" or fuck off? Or do we convince (or tell) the existing editorial body that it's time to change its behavior in order to be more welcoming to more diverse (women and non-white) newcomers?


 * Even if the majority of my colleagues misunderstand and loathe me, I hope that you and I come to understand each other better,, because I honestly think we have a lot in common. We've simply been pushed together under less-than-optimal circumstances. Lightbreather (talk) 16:34, 7 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I think we can, your comments are well-taken. The IT world sounds absolutely horrid, my own experiences with a computer business were not like that, but I never got into programming or anything like that.  And indeed, being out in the open at least made the lawsuits easier to win back in the day.  The stuff happening online today and the cyber-bullying in particular of certain women it just astonishing - and yes, creepier.  It's a Brave New World of communication for sexism, racism and pretty much anything else.  These trolls might be the only creep in their little neighborhood, but they can find a million other fellow travelers online, even if scattered widely.  Frankly, though, I don't think it is just a "male virtual office" problem so much as it is a construction site. (Remember, Jimbo started by doing a softcore porn site called Bomis; so IMHO it's amazing things aren't worse)  Or maybe like the island in Lord of the Flies and there are not enough grownups. (Though if you want to see the land of no grownups, well, I don't recommend anyone check out the cesspool that is "Encyclopedia Dramatica" - there's a rather whitewashed WP article on it - it's worse than a cesspool - but be warned that it exists and is hosted on a non-USA server because it probably would be shut down anywhere in the civilized world - and that's where the trolls breed...they include attack pages on a number of decent wikipedia users, anyone who has seriously done some troll-smacking).  I guess my take on the civility issue is that it's important to go after the climate and culture, not so much minor individuals who poke at the rules for shock value.  The real problem I see is that the drama boards are drama boards and generally just waste immense amounts of bandwidth with argumentation until the bullies either get recognized as such and blocked or else run off everyone else.  Folks like E and C are not the real problem; the system that cannot distinguish that  E & C commit "misdemeanors" while more vicious trolls are organizing felonies (See articles on Zoe Quinn, Anita Sarkeesian, GamerGate) is the problem.  Corbett's block log is as long as your arm, and most of the time he gets blocked for things we'd quietly applaud - telling the self-righteous to stuff it.  But a few times he's missed and once hit you; that sucks but that doesn't make him the problem you think he is.  (He's more like that curmudgeon in the back desk who actually wouldn't hurt a flea but growls at everyone who walks by; then you realize he was with the company since 1950 and knows way more than you think.)  CMDC has also got a lot of issues, but yeah, I'm not going there.   Montanabw (talk)  04:38, 8 October 2014 (UTC)


 * , I still need to reply in full, but one thing led to another and today I ended up reading this discussion, which took me to this discussion, and that brings up a couple questions. 1. Why is the word "porn" buried in the fourth paragraph of the Bomis lead? (And even then, links to "soft-core porn.") And what are "Asian bomis porn" and "Bomis porn ring"? (Which aren't in the Bomis article, but pop-up on a google of "bomis" minus Wikipedia - and sure as hell don't link to "soft-core porn"!) Lightbreather (talk) 17:05, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Webring 18:08, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I figured it was most likely a webring... but what about the "bomis" part? What does that mean? Lightbreather (talk) 20:54, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I read that as just saying they administered/branded the ring. Gaijin42 (talk) 21:02, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * "They" who? Bomis? I'm sorry if I seem dense, but do you know if "bomis" is a term for something? Perhaps in another language? Lightbreather (talk) 21:04, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * its just the name they chose for the site I think. Its some sort of last name, but I doubt that is the connection. Just an "internety" name I think. Gaijin42 (talk) 21:07, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * According to Wales, it was an acronym for "Bitter old men in suits". Almost all the people involved in Bomis are contactable, either on Wikipedia or with a brief Google search, if you really care, including the (in hindsight) most important figures, Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger. 92.18.154.193 (talk) 21:23, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I have little interest in diving into that cesspool, so I'm not a lot of help answering your questions. but all I feel I really need to know is this.  Montanabw (talk)  21:01, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * No problem, Mbw. I don't really like to go there myself, but without editors like us, it's mostly kids running the candy shop. Lightbreather (talk) 21:11, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Stop Porn Culture for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Stop Porn Culture is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Stop Porn Culture until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.. --Pudeo' 11:24, 9 October 2014 (UTC)