ᱜᱷᱚᱴᱚᱱ ᱥᱚᱫᱚᱨ ᱦᱚᱨᱟ
|
Incident Reporting System
Helping to get help in harmful incidents
|
As Product Safety and Integrity, we want to provide safer and healthier environments for communities. We are building the Incident Reporting System (IRS) to make it easy for users to find the right path to get help when experiencing a harmful incident.
Goals
- ᱦᱮᱨᱟᱥᱢᱮᱱᱴ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱮᱠᱥᱯᱮᱨᱤᱭᱮᱱᱥ ᱠᱟᱛᱮᱫ ᱦᱚᱲ ᱞᱟᱹᱜᱤᱫ ᱜᱚᱲᱚ ᱧᱟᱢ ᱥᱚᱦᱚᱡ ᱮᱢ ᱵᱮᱱᱟᱣ᱾
- ᱚᱱᱟ ᱦᱟᱞᱚᱛ ᱠᱚ ᱪᱟᱵᱟᱭ ᱢᱮ ᱡᱟᱦᱟᱸ ᱨᱮ ᱦᱚᱲ ᱵᱟᱝ ᱠᱚ ᱨᱤᱯᱳᱨᱴ ᱫᱟᱲᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ ᱪᱮᱫᱟᱜ ᱥᱮ ᱩᱱᱠᱩ ᱵᱟᱝ ᱠᱚ ᱵᱟᱰᱟᱭᱟ ᱦᱮᱨᱟᱥᱢᱮᱱᱴ ᱪᱮᱫ ᱞᱮᱠᱟᱛᱮ ᱨᱤᱯᱳᱨᱴ ᱦᱩᱭᱩᱜᱼᱟ᱾
- ᱱᱚᱶᱟ ᱵᱟᱰᱟᱭ ᱮᱢ ᱡᱮ ᱦᱮᱨᱟᱥᱢᱮᱱᱴ ᱨᱤᱯᱳᱨᱴ ᱴᱷᱤᱠᱟᱹᱱ ᱡᱟᱜᱟ ᱨᱮ ᱥᱮᱴᱮᱨᱚᱜ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ ᱚᱠᱚᱭ ᱞᱳᱠᱟᱞ ᱠᱚᱢᱭᱩᱱᱤᱴᱤ ᱯᱨᱚᱥᱮᱥ ᱦᱤᱥᱟᱹᱵᱽ ᱛᱮ ᱦᱮᱸᱰᱮᱞᱮᱫᱟ᱾
- Ensure responders are not overwhelmed with invalid reports or issues that belong elsewhere.
ᱵᱮᱠᱜᱽᱨᱟᱣᱩᱱᱰ
ᱵᱟᱹᱲᱤᱡ ᱜᱷᱚᱴᱱᱟ ᱠᱚ ᱨᱤᱯᱚᱴ ᱟᱨ ᱯᱨᱚᱥᱮᱥ ᱫᱚ ᱣᱤᱠᱤᱢᱤᱰᱤᱭᱟ ᱠᱚᱢᱩᱱᱤᱴᱤ ᱞᱟᱹᱜᱤᱫ ᱟᱹᱰᱤ ᱥᱮᱨᱢᱟ ᱠᱷᱚᱱ ᱜᱮ ᱢᱤᱫ ᱢᱩᱬ ᱜᱚᱴᱷᱚᱱ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ᱾ ᱱᱟᱣᱟ ᱭᱩᱱᱤᱵᱷᱚᱨᱥᱟᱞ ᱠᱳᱰ ᱚᱯᱷ ᱠᱚᱱᱰᱟᱠᱴ ᱵᱮᱱᱟᱣᱜ ᱠᱟᱱ ᱛᱮ, ᱵᱮᱵᱷᱟᱨᱤᱭᱟᱹ ᱨᱤᱯᱚᱴ ᱥᱤᱥᱴᱮᱢ ᱤᱫᱤ ᱠᱟᱛᱮᱜ ᱦᱚᱸ ᱜᱟᱞᱢᱟᱨᱟᱣ ᱫᱚ ᱞᱟᱹᱠᱛᱤᱭᱟᱱ ᱜᱮᱭᱟ᱾
The way misconduct and policy violations are dealt with across Wikimedia spaces, wikis, and platforms has developed organically. Each community and group has their way of reporting and processing incidents. It happens via wiki talk pages, noticeboards, email, or private discussions on off-wiki communication channels (Discord, Telegram, and more).
For many users, it's been unclear what to do when an incident happens: where to go, who to talk to, how to report, what information to include in the report, how the report is processed, what happens afterwards, etc. Users must know how to flag an issue and where to go to get help. Some do not feel safe reporting incidents because of the complexity of the reporting process or due to privacy concerns. There is also very little information on what will happen once a report is made and what expectations the user should have.
ᱟᱯᱰᱮᱴ ᱠᱚ
: End of the trial on English Wikipedia
Between May and early July, Incident Reporting System was tested on English Wikipedia, starting from 5% to 100% of the eligible users. Overall, the tool was not generating a high volume of reports, and we did not see signs or hear any volunteer concerns that the tool was creating any disruption. We did see users interacting with it, and submitting both emergency and non-emergency reports.
Early in the trial, per the English Wikipedia functionaries feedback, we added a feature (we call it direct reporting) where, if the community selected an email-based destination for a particular category of unwanted behavior, the form would show the user a text area to type in the report, and it would then send the report directly to that community-chosen email address.
The tool does not support direct reporting for most categories of unwanted behavior – instead, the user is provided a link and description (chosen by the community) of where to go and what to do there.
The link may include the preload parameter, making it easier to add well-structured reports.
The two charts show that:
- At the end of the trial, the Report button was being shown to around 12,000 users per day.
- The categories most commonly initially selected by users were: Bullying / intimidation, Disruptive editing, and Vandalism – these three add up to over a half of all reports.
We know there are still more improvements to make, including the potential for streamlining the flow through deeper integration with on-wiki processes. But we think the trial has at least demonstrated that this feature can be integrated in a way that doesn't disrupt abuse handling, and can be iterated on from there. We appreciate the community members' thoughts as we consider what to do next. And a special thank you to the functionaries and other volunteers who helped support this trial and help other users.
Product & design specifications
Use cases
The needs of a user looking to get help with a harmful incident are as follows:
- I want to be able to indicate the type of the incident I'm experiencing so that I can get help with resolving the issue.
- I want to easily get information about the help resources available that are relevant to the issue I'm experiencing.
- I want to be clearly informed when the help is provided by the community and not the Foundation, so that I can adjust my expectations accordingly.
The needs of an administrator/functionary are as follows:
- I want to be able to customize the "support information" step that is presented to reporters, according to the incident they're experiencing and the policies of my wiki.
- If my wiki is not large, I want to have a standard/default template that I can use in case my wiki doesn't have established policies or processes.
Immediate threats of physical harm (processed by T&S)
The user can submit a report when they become aware of a situation involving serious risk to their (or someone else's) physical safety. Once submitted, these reports are sent to the Trust and Safety team at the Wikimedia Foundation who are responsible for reviewing and responding to such issues.
Any other incidents (processed by community members)
Users can select one of the types of unwanted behavior as defined in the Universal Code of Conduct. They are guided to a "support information" step that provides clear information on how to get support with an incident of the selected type. The goal is to ensure users receive the right support in a way that reflects the needs and practices of the local community.
For each incident type, local communities can customize a limited number of content sections with wiki-specific terminology and links, according to their policies and practices.
Administrators can now set up external links as the destinations for reporting. This allows the use of URL query string parameters such as preload and may make the reporting even simpler and more efficient.
Incident types
| 1st-tier category | 2nd-tier category | UCoC provision | UCoC definition, or description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immediate threat of physical harm (processed by T&S) | Threats of physical harm | — | Intending to commit violence against an individual |
| Threats of self harm | — | Intending to commit an act of harming oneself | |
| Threats of public harm | — | Intending to commit an act of mass violence | |
| Unacceptable user behavior (processed by community members) | Bullying, intimidation, threats or repeated insults | 3.1 – Harassment | "This includes name calling, using slurs or stereotypes, and any attacks based on personal characteristics. Insults may refer to perceived characteristics like intelligence, appearance, ethnicity, race, religion (or lack thereof), culture, caste, sexual orientation, gender, sex, disability, age, nationality, political affiliation, or other characteristics. In some cases, repeated mockery, sarcasm, or aggression constitute insults collectively, even if individual statements would not."
"Explicitly or implicitly suggesting the possibility of physical violence, unfair embarrassment, unfair and unjustified reputational harm, or intimidation by suggesting gratuitous legal action to win an argument or force someone to behave the way you want." "This includes encouraging someone else to commit self-harm or suicide as well as encouraging someone to conduct violent attacks on a third party." |
| Sexual harassment | "Sexual attention or advances of any kind towards others where the person knows or reasonably should know that the attention is unwelcome or in situations where consent cannot be communicated." | ||
| Exposing private personal information (Doxing) | "Sharing other contributors' private information, such as name, place of employment, physical or email address without their explicit consent either on the Wikimedia projects or elsewhere, or sharing information concerning their Wikimedia activity outside the projects." | ||
| Trolling or Hounding (Stalking) | "Deliberately disrupting conversations or posting in bad-faith to intentionally provoke."
"Following a person across the project(s) and repeatedly critiquing their work mainly with the intent to upset or discourage them. If problems are continuing after efforts to communicate and educate, communities may need to address them through established community processes." | ||
| Hateful or discriminatory content | 3.3 – Content vandalism and abuse of the projects | Content vandalism containing "hate speech in any form, or discriminatory language aimed at vilifying, humiliating, inciting hatred against individuals or groups on the basis of who they are or their personal beliefs"
"The use of symbols, images, categories, tags or other kinds of content that are intimidating or harmful to others outside of the context of encyclopedic, informational use. This includes imposing schemes on content intended to marginalize or ostracize" (Hate speech towards an editor falls under "Bullying, intimidation, threats or repeated insults") | |
| Spam or promotional content | Other content vandalism | ||
| Something else | Including 3.2 – Abuse of power, privilege, or influence |
Community configuration
Community Configuration is a tool allowing communities to set up and control the configuration of different features. For the Incident Reporting System we are using Community Configuration to allow communities to customize the "support information" step.
Example of how customizing the "support information" step for "Exposing private personal information (Doxing)" might look:
-
The "support information" step will have a default view (fields that are left blank will not display) -
Communities will then be able to customize the default view via Community Configuration
.png)
.png)
Deployment timeline
- First and limited version on Portuguese Wikipedia –
- Next pilot wikis –
- English Wikipedia trial – –
Contact
ᱵᱟᱹᱲᱛᱤ ᱠᱩᱠᱞᱤ ᱠᱚ
ᱪᱮᱫ ᱯᱷᱟᱣᱩᱱᱰᱮᱥᱚᱱ ᱱᱤᱛᱚᱜ ᱢᱮᱱᱟᱜ ᱠᱚᱢᱭᱩᱱᱤᱴᱤ ᱯᱨᱚᱥᱮᱥ ᱵᱚᱫᱚᱞ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱠᱩᱨᱩᱢᱩᱴᱩᱭᱮᱫᱟ?
IRS ᱞᱟᱹᱜᱤᱫ ᱟᱞᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱯᱞᱟᱱ ᱫᱚ ᱚᱠᱟ ᱦᱚᱸ ᱠᱚᱢᱭᱩᱱᱤᱴᱤ ᱯᱨᱚᱥᱮᱥ ᱵᱚᱫᱚᱞ ᱫᱚ ᱵᱟᱝ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ᱾ ᱡᱚᱥ ᱫᱚ ᱱᱤᱛᱚᱜ ᱢᱮᱱᱟᱜ ᱯᱨᱚᱥᱮᱥ ᱠᱚ ᱥᱟᱞᱟᱜ ᱡᱩᱲᱟᱹᱭ ᱛᱟᱦᱮᱱ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ᱾ ᱢᱩᱪᱟᱹᱫ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱡᱚᱥ ᱫᱚ ᱦᱩᱭᱩᱜ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ:
ᱪᱮᱫ ᱥᱮᱨᱢᱟ ᱨᱮ ᱛᱤᱱᱟᱹᱜ ᱤᱱᱥᱤᱰᱮᱱᱴ ᱨᱤᱯᱳᱨᱴ ᱦᱩᱭᱩᱜ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ ᱚᱱᱟ ᱵᱟᱵᱚᱛ ᱛᱮ ᱰᱮᱴᱟ ᱢᱮᱱᱟᱜᱼᱟ?
We have usage data collected on the wikis where IRS has been deployed. The largest of them is Portuguese Wikipedia. However, the volume of data is too low to make predictions based on it. We want to address this by launching a trial on English Wikipedia, with the audience similar to the entire audience on Portuguese Wikipedia.
ᱱᱤᱛᱚᱜ ᱫᱚ ᱟᱞᱮ ᱴᱷᱮᱱ ᱵᱮᱵᱷᱟᱨ ᱞᱟᱹᱜᱤᱫ ᱵᱷᱟᱹᱜᱤ ᱰᱮᱴᱟ ᱵᱟᱹᱱᱩᱜᱼᱟ᱾ ᱱᱚᱶᱟ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱵᱟᱨᱭᱟ ᱠᱟᱨᱚᱱ ᱢᱮᱱᱟᱜᱼᱟ᱾ ᱯᱩᱭᱞᱩ, ᱤᱥᱩ ᱠᱚ ᱟᱹᱰᱤ ᱞᱮᱠᱟᱛᱮ ᱨᱤᱯᱳᱨᱴ ᱦᱩᱭᱩᱜ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ ᱟᱨ ᱚᱱᱟ ᱠᱚ ᱠᱚᱢᱭᱩᱱᱤᱴᱤ ᱠᱷᱚᱱ ᱠᱚᱢᱭᱩᱱᱤᱴᱤ ᱵᱷᱮᱜᱟᱨ ᱜᱮᱭᱟ᱾ ᱚᱱᱟ ᱰᱮᱴᱟ ᱯᱩᱨᱟᱹᱣ ᱟᱨ ᱥᱟᱹᱯᱷᱟᱹᱣ ᱥᱟᱞᱟᱜ ᱦᱟᱛᱟᱣ ᱫᱚ ᱟᱹᱰᱤ ᱜᱮ ᱠᱚᱢᱯᱞᱤᱠᱮᱴᱮᱰ ᱜᱮᱭᱟ ᱟᱨ ᱚᱱᱟ ᱨᱮ ᱟᱹᱰᱤ ᱜᱟᱱ ᱚᱠᱛᱚ ᱞᱟᱜᱟᱜᱼᱟ᱾ ᱫᱚᱥᱟᱨ, ᱤᱥᱩ ᱠᱚᱣᱟᱜ ᱢᱮᱱᱮᱛ ᱦᱚᱸ ᱵᱷᱮᱜᱟᱨ ᱜᱮᱭᱟ᱾ ᱪᱮᱫ ᱪᱤᱠᱟᱹ ᱦᱮᱨᱟᱥᱢᱮᱱᱴ ᱞᱮᱠᱟᱛᱮ ᱠᱚ ᱢᱟᱱᱟᱣᱟ ᱚᱱᱟ ᱫᱚ ᱱᱩᱠᱩᱣᱟᱜ ᱠᱟᱹᱢᱤ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ ( ᱡᱮᱞᱮᱠᱟ ᱯᱨᱚᱢᱳᱥᱚᱱᱟᱞ ᱟᱨᱴᱤᱠᱤᱞ ᱰᱤᱞᱤᱴ ᱮᱢᱟᱱ)᱾ ᱦᱮᱨᱟᱥᱢᱮᱱᱴ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱨᱤᱵᱷᱤᱭᱩ ᱞᱟᱹᱜᱤᱫ ᱠᱟᱹᱞᱪᱟᱹᱨ ᱟᱨ ᱠᱚᱢᱭᱩᱱᱤᱴᱤ ᱠᱚᱱᱴᱮᱠᱥᱴ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱦᱚᱸ ᱞᱟᱹᱠᱛᱤ ᱦᱩᱭ ᱫᱟᱲᱮᱭᱟᱜᱼᱟ᱾ ᱟᱞᱮ ᱰᱮᱴᱟ ᱚᱴᱚᱢᱮᱴ ᱟᱨ ᱵᱤᱡᱩᱣᱟᱞᱟᱭᱤᱡᱽ ᱟᱨ ᱚᱵᱽᱡᱮᱠᱴᱤᱵᱷᱞᱤ ᱵᱟᱞᱮ ᱞᱮᱠᱷᱟ ᱫᱟᱲᱮᱭᱟᱜᱼᱟ᱾ ᱤᱱᱥᱤᱰᱮᱱᱴ ᱨᱤᱯᱳᱨᱴᱤᱝ ᱥᱤᱥᱴᱮᱢ ᱱᱚᱶᱟ ᱰᱮᱴᱟ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱞᱟᱹᱠᱛᱤ ᱠᱚ ᱥᱚᱞᱦᱮ ᱞᱟᱹᱜᱤᱫ ᱢᱤᱫ ᱫᱟᱣ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ᱾ There are a couple of reasons for this. First, issues are reported in various ways and those differ from community to community. Capturing that data completely and cleanly is highly complicated and would be very time consuming. Second, the interpretation of issues also differs. Some things that are interpreted as harassment are just wiki business (e.g. deleting a promotional article). Review of user conduct/behaviour issues may also need cultural or community context. We cannot automate and visualize data or count it objectively. The incident reporting system is an opportunity to solve some of these data needs.
How are different types of harmful incidents – such as harassment, threats, or misconduct – defined in the Incident Reporting System?
ᱫᱟᱭᱟ ᱠᱟᱛᱮ ᱭᱩᱱᱤᱵᱷᱚᱨᱥᱟᱞ ᱠᱳᱰ ᱚᱯᱷ ᱠᱚᱱᱰᱟᱠᱴ ᱨᱮ ᱰᱮᱯᱷᱤᱱᱮᱥᱚᱱ ᱠᱚ ᱧᱮᱞ ᱢᱮ᱾
ᱯᱨᱚᱰᱟᱠᱴ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱯᱩᱭᱞᱩ ᱵᱷᱚᱨᱥᱚᱱ ᱥᱟᱞᱟᱜ ᱟᱯᱮ ᱚᱠᱟ ᱠᱩᱠᱞᱤ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱛᱮᱞᱟ ᱯᱮ ᱠᱩᱨᱩᱢᱩᱴᱩᱭᱮᱫᱟ?
ᱱᱚᱰᱮ ᱫᱚ ᱚᱱᱟ ᱠᱩᱠᱞᱤ ᱠᱚ ᱢᱮᱱᱟᱜᱼᱟ ᱡᱟᱦᱟᱸ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱛᱮᱞᱟ ᱞᱟᱹᱠᱛᱤ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ:
- What kind of user conduct/behavior issues do people need help with?
- How many people report the respective kinds of issues?
- ᱱᱚᱶᱟ ᱯᱨᱚᱵᱞᱮᱢ ᱛᱤᱱᱟᱹᱜ ᱢᱟᱨᱟᱝ ᱜᱮᱭᱟ?
- ᱪᱮᱫ ᱟᱞᱮ ᱦᱮᱨᱟᱥᱢᱮᱱᱴ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱤᱥᱩ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱢᱮᱜᱽᱱᱤᱪᱭᱩᱰ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱢᱤᱫ ᱥᱟᱹᱯᱷᱟᱹᱣ ᱪᱤᱛᱟᱹᱨ ᱧᱟᱢ ᱫᱟᱲᱮᱭᱟᱜᱼᱟ? ᱪᱮᱫ ᱟᱞᱮ ᱨᱤᱯᱳᱨᱴ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱮᱞᱠᱷᱟ ᱥᱩᱨ ᱨᱮ ᱠᱤᱪᱷᱩ ᱰᱮᱴᱟ ᱧᱟᱢ ᱫᱟᱲᱮᱭᱟᱜᱼᱟ? ᱪᱮᱫ ᱦᱮᱨᱟᱥᱢᱮᱱᱴ ᱟᱱᱰᱟᱨᱨᱤᱯᱳᱨᱴᱮᱰ ᱥᱮ ᱳᱵᱷᱟᱨᱨᱤᱯᱳᱨᱴᱮᱰ ᱜᱮᱭᱟ?
- ᱦᱟᱹᱞᱤ ᱦᱚᱲ ᱦᱮᱨᱟᱥᱢᱮᱱᱴ ᱪᱮᱫᱟᱜ ᱵᱟᱝ ᱠᱚ ᱨᱤᱯᱳᱨᱴᱮᱫᱟ ᱪᱮᱫᱟᱜ ᱥᱮ ᱱᱚᱶᱟ ᱫᱚ ᱵᱟᱝ ᱦᱩᱭᱩᱜ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ ᱥᱮ ᱩᱱᱠᱩ ᱵᱟᱝ ᱠᱚ ᱵᱟᱰᱟᱭᱟ ᱪᱮᱫ ᱞᱮᱠᱟᱛᱮ ᱨᱤᱯᱳᱨᱴ ᱦᱩᱭᱩᱜᱼᱟ?
- ᱱᱚᱶᱟ ᱟᱞᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱱᱤᱛᱚᱜ ᱟᱜ ᱥᱮᱴᱚᱯ ᱥᱟᱞᱟᱜ ᱦᱮᱸᱰᱮᱞ ᱞᱟᱹᱜᱤᱫ ᱟᱹᱰᱤ ᱜᱟᱱ ᱦᱩᱭᱩᱜᱼᱟ, ᱥᱮ ᱵᱟᱝ?
- ᱣᱤᱠᱤ ᱯᱨᱚᱥᱮᱥ ᱵᱟᱝ ᱠᱚ ᱵᱩᱡᱷᱟᱹᱣ ᱠᱷᱟᱹᱛᱤᱨ ᱛᱤᱱᱟᱹᱜ ᱦᱚᱲ ᱵᱷᱩᱞ ᱠᱚ ᱨᱤᱯᱳᱨᱴᱮᱫᱟ ᱚᱱᱟ ᱵᱷᱮᱜᱟᱨ ᱛᱤᱱᱟᱹᱜ ᱜᱟᱱ ᱠᱚᱢᱯᱞᱮᱱ ᱵᱷᱮᱜᱟᱨ ᱜᱮᱭᱟ? ᱪᱮᱫ ᱟᱞᱮ ᱵᱷᱮᱜᱟᱨ ᱵᱷᱮᱜᱟᱨ ᱠᱚᱢᱯᱞᱮᱱ ᱠᱚ ᱵᱟᱪᱷᱟᱣ ᱟᱨ ᱵᱟᱹᱲᱤᱡ ᱨᱤᱯᱳᱨᱴ ᱠᱚ ᱪᱷᱟᱱᱜᱟᱣ ᱫᱟᱲᱮᱭᱟᱜᱼᱟ ᱡᱟᱦᱟᱸ ᱠᱷᱟᱹᱛᱤᱨ ᱵᱚᱞᱚᱱᱴᱤᱭᱟᱨ ᱥᱮ ᱥᱴᱟᱯᱷ ᱠᱚᱣᱟᱜ ᱚᱠᱛᱚ ᱵᱟᱧᱪᱟᱣ ᱫᱟᱲᱮᱭᱟᱜᱼᱟ?
- ᱪᱮᱫ ᱟᱞᱮ ᱟᱹᱰᱤ ᱜᱟᱱ ᱨᱤᱯᱳᱨᱴ ᱞᱮ ᱧᱟᱢᱟ ᱡᱟᱦᱟᱸ ᱫᱚ ᱩᱱᱠᱩ ᱦᱚᱲ ᱠᱚ ᱯᱷᱟᱭᱤᱞ ᱟᱠᱟᱫᱟ ᱡᱟᱦᱟᱸ ᱫᱚ ᱩᱱᱠᱩᱣᱟᱜ ᱮᱰᱤᱴ ᱨᱤᱵᱷᱚᱨᱴ ᱥᱮ ᱩᱱᱠᱩᱣᱟᱜ ᱯᱮᱡ ᱰᱤᱞᱤᱴ ᱠᱷᱟᱹᱛᱤᱨ ᱠᱚ ᱵᱟᱹᱲᱤᱡ ᱟᱠᱟᱱᱟ? ᱟᱞᱮ ᱩᱱᱠᱩ ᱥᱟᱞᱟᱜ ᱪᱮᱫ ᱞᱮ ᱪᱤᱠᱟᱹᱭᱟ?
Wikimedia ᱢᱩᱵᱷᱢᱮᱱᱴ ᱫᱚ ᱮᱴᱟᱜ ᱢᱟᱨᱟᱝ ᱯᱞᱮᱴᱯᱷᱚᱨᱢ ᱞᱮᱠᱟ Facebook/Reddit ᱦᱮᱨᱟᱥᱢᱮᱱᱴ ᱪᱮᱫ ᱞᱮᱠᱟ ᱠᱚ ᱦᱮᱸᱰᱮᱞᱮᱫᱟ ᱚᱱᱟ ᱥᱟᱞᱟᱜ ᱪᱮᱫ ᱞᱮᱠᱟ ᱛᱩᱞᱟᱹ ᱡᱚᱠᱷᱟ ᱦᱩᱭᱩᱜᱼᱟ?
ᱱᱚᱝᱠᱟ ᱫᱚ ᱟᱞᱮ ᱴᱷᱮᱱ ᱚᱠᱟ ᱦᱚᱸ ᱥᱚᱢᱟᱱ ᱚᱱᱞᱟᱤᱱ ᱮᱯᱷᱤᱱᱤᱴᱤ ᱜᱨᱩᱯ ᱵᱟᱹᱱᱩᱜᱼᱟ, ᱢᱮᱱᱠᱷᱟᱱ ᱦᱮᱨᱟᱥᱢᱮᱱᱴ ᱪᱮᱫ ᱞᱮᱠᱟ ᱦᱮᱸᱰᱮᱞ ᱦᱩᱭᱩᱜ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ ᱚᱱᱟ ᱵᱟᱵᱚᱛ ᱛᱮ Wikimedia ᱢᱩᱵᱷᱢᱮᱱᱴ ᱫᱚ Facebook ᱟᱨ Reddit ᱥᱟᱞᱟᱜ ᱡᱟᱹᱥᱛᱤ ᱡᱩᱲᱟᱹᱭ ᱛᱟᱦᱮᱱᱟ᱾ ᱪᱮᱫ ᱢᱟᱱᱟᱣ ᱞᱟᱹᱜᱤᱫ ᱞᱟᱹᱠᱛᱤ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ ᱚᱱᱟ ᱫᱚ ᱦᱩᱭᱩᱜ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ ᱪᱮᱫ ᱦᱚᱸ ᱦᱮᱨᱟᱥᱢᱮᱱᱴ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱥᱚᱞᱦᱮ ᱵᱟᱝ ᱠᱚ ᱩᱰᱩᱠ ᱟᱠᱟᱫᱟ᱾ ᱮᱴᱟᱜ ᱯᱞᱮᱴᱯᱷᱚᱨᱢ ᱠᱚ ᱠᱚᱱᱴᱮᱱᱴ ᱢᱚᱰᱟᱨᱮᱥᱚᱱ ᱥᱟᱞᱟᱜ ᱡᱷᱟᱢᱮᱞᱟᱭᱮᱫᱟ, ᱟᱨ ᱡᱟᱹᱥᱛᱤ ᱠᱟᱛᱮᱫ ᱩᱱᱠᱩ ᱴᱷᱮᱱ ᱯᱮᱰ ᱥᱴᱟᱯᱷ ᱢᱮᱱᱟᱜ ᱠᱚᱣᱟ ᱡᱟᱦᱟᱸᱭ ᱱᱚᱶᱟ ᱥᱟᱞᱟᱜ ᱠᱚ ᱰᱤᱞᱮᱫᱟ᱾ ᱟᱞᱮ ᱟᱨ Reddit ᱟᱨ Facebook ᱛᱟᱞᱟ ᱨᱮ ᱵᱟᱨᱭᱟ ᱢᱟᱨᱟᱝ ᱵᱷᱮᱜᱟᱨ ᱫᱚ ᱦᱩᱭᱩᱜ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ ᱟᱞᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱯᱨᱚᱡᱮᱠᱴ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱜᱽᱞᱳᱵᱟᱞᱤ ᱠᱚᱞᱮᱵᱳᱨᱮᱴᱤᱵᱷ ᱱᱮᱪᱟᱨ ᱟᱨ ᱠᱚᱢᱭᱩᱱᱤᱴᱤ ᱞᱮᱵᱮᱞ ᱨᱮ ᱦᱮᱨᱟᱥᱢᱮᱱᱴ ᱪᱮᱫ ᱞᱮᱠᱟ ᱥᱚᱞᱦᱮ ᱞᱟᱹᱜᱤᱫ ᱠᱚᱢᱭᱩᱱᱤᱴᱤ ᱠᱟᱹᱢᱤᱭᱮᱫᱟ᱾
ᱯᱨᱤᱼᱯᱨᱚᱡᱮᱠᱴ ᱨᱤᱥᱟᱨᱪ
ᱱᱚᱶᱟ ᱞᱟᱛᱟᱨ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱰᱚᱠᱩᱢᱮᱱᱴ ᱫᱚ ᱒᱐᱑᱕-᱒᱐᱒᱒ ᱥᱟᱹᱦᱤᱛ ᱛᱟᱞᱟᱨᱮ ᱣᱤᱠᱤᱢᱤᱰᱤᱭᱟ ᱯᱷᱟᱣᱩᱱᱰᱮᱥᱚᱱ ᱣᱤᱠᱤᱢᱤᱰᱤᱭᱟ ᱯᱨᱚᱡᱮᱠᱴ ᱨᱮ ᱚᱱᱞᱟᱤᱱ ᱦᱮᱨᱟᱥᱢᱮᱱᱴ ᱪᱮᱛᱟᱱ ᱨᱮ ᱠᱚᱨᱟᱣ ᱟᱠᱟᱫ ᱨᱤᱥᱟᱨᱪ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱢᱤᱫ ᱯᱩᱨᱟᱹᱣ ᱟᱠᱟᱱ ᱨᱤᱵᱷᱤᱭᱩ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ᱾ ᱱᱚᱶᱟ ᱨᱤᱵᱷᱤᱭᱩ ᱨᱮ ᱟᱞᱮ ᱢᱩᱬ ᱛᱷᱤᱢ, ᱤᱱᱥᱟᱭᱤᱴ ᱟᱨ ᱠᱚᱱᱥᱚᱨᱱ ᱮᱨᱤᱭᱟ ᱠᱚ ᱪᱤᱱᱦᱟᱹᱣ ᱟᱠᱟᱫᱟ ᱟᱨ ᱞᱤᱴᱟᱨᱮᱪᱟᱨ ᱨᱮ ᱥᱚᱡᱷᱮ ᱡᱚᱯᱚᱲᱟᱣ ᱞᱤᱸᱠ ᱮᱢ ᱟᱠᱟᱫᱟ᱾
ᱟᱞᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱴᱤᱢ ᱟᱞᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱠᱟᱹᱢᱤ ᱵᱟᱰᱟᱭ ᱮᱢ ᱞᱟᱹᱜᱤᱫ ᱞᱟᱦᱟᱛᱮᱱᱟᱜ ᱨᱤᱥᱟᱨᱪ ᱟᱨ ᱠᱚᱢᱭᱩᱱᱤᱴᱤ ᱠᱚᱱᱥᱚᱞᱴᱮᱥᱚᱱ ᱮ ᱯᱟᱲᱦᱟᱣ ᱟᱠᱟᱫᱟ᱾ ᱟᱞᱮ ᱫᱚ ᱠᱚᱢᱭᱩᱱᱤᱴᱤᱦᱮᱞᱛᱷᱤᱱᱤᱥᱤᱭᱮᱴᱤᱵᱷᱭᱩᱡᱚᱨᱨᱤᱯᱳᱨᱴᱤᱝᱥᱤᱥᱴᱮᱢᱯᱨᱚᱯᱚᱡᱟᱞ ᱟᱨ ᱒᱐᱑᱙ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱭᱩᱡᱚᱨ ᱨᱤᱯᱳᱨᱴᱤᱝ ᱥᱤᱥᱴᱮᱢ ᱠᱚᱱᱥᱚᱞᱴᱮᱥᱚᱱ ᱫᱚᱲᱦᱟᱛᱮ ᱧᱮᱞ ᱟᱠᱟᱫᱟ᱾ ᱟᱞᱮ ᱱᱚᱶᱟ ᱵᱩᱡᱷᱟᱹᱣ ᱞᱟᱹᱜᱤᱫ ᱛᱮ ᱣᱤᱠᱤ ᱠᱚᱨᱮ ᱠᱚᱱᱯᱷᱞᱤᱠᱴ ᱨᱮᱡᱚᱞᱩᱥᱚᱱ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱪᱟᱞᱟᱣ ᱠᱚ ᱢᱮᱯ ᱞᱟᱹᱜᱤᱫ ᱛᱮ ᱠᱩᱨᱩᱢᱩᱴᱩ ᱮᱫᱟ ᱡᱮ ᱱᱤᱛᱚᱜ ᱠᱚᱢᱭᱩᱱᱤᱴᱤ ᱠᱚ ᱚᱠᱟ ᱞᱮᱠᱟᱛᱮ ᱠᱚᱱᱯᱷᱞᱤᱠᱴ ᱠᱚ ᱢᱮᱱᱮᱡᱽ ᱮᱫᱟ᱾ ᱞᱟᱛᱟᱨ ᱨᱮ ᱤᱴᱟᱞᱤᱭᱟᱱ ᱣᱤᱠᱤᱯᱤᱰᱤᱭᱟ ᱠᱚᱱᱯᱷᱞᱤᱠᱴ ᱨᱮᱡᱚᱞᱩᱥᱚᱱ ᱪᱟᱞᱟᱣ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱢᱮᱯ ᱢᱮᱱᱟᱜᱼᱟ᱾ ᱱᱚᱶᱟ ᱨᱮ ᱚᱴᱚᱢᱮᱥᱚᱱ ᱞᱟᱹᱜᱤᱫ ᱫᱟᱣ ᱪᱮᱛᱟᱱ ᱨᱮ ᱱᱳᱴᱥ ᱢᱮᱱᱟᱜᱼᱟ᱾
-
᱒᱐᱑᱕–᱒᱐᱒᱒ ᱠᱷᱚᱱ ᱨᱤᱥᱟᱨᱪ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱢᱤᱫ ᱥᱤᱱᱛᱷᱮᱥᱤᱥ ᱡᱟᱦᱟᱸ ᱫᱚ ᱯᱨᱚᱵᱞᱮᱢ ᱡᱟᱜᱟ ᱨᱮ ᱢᱩᱬᱩᱛ ᱛᱷᱤᱢ ᱥᱟᱶᱛᱮ ᱵᱮᱵᱷᱟᱨᱤᱭᱟᱹ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱞᱟᱹᱠᱛᱤ, ᱪᱮᱞᱮᱸᱡᱽ, ᱵᱤᱪᱟᱹᱨ ᱟᱨ ᱢᱟᱬᱟᱝ ᱠᱟᱹᱢᱤ ᱠᱚ ᱪᱤᱱᱦᱟᱹᱣ ᱮᱫᱟ᱾ -
ᱤᱴᱟᱞᱤᱭᱟᱱ ᱣᱤᱠᱤᱯᱤᱰᱤᱭᱟ ᱨᱮ, ᱠᱚᱱᱯᱷᱞᱤᱠᱴ ᱨᱮᱡᱚᱞᱩᱥᱚᱱ ᱞᱟᱹᱜᱤᱫ ᱢᱤᱫ ᱓-ᱮᱥᱴᱮᱯ ᱯᱚᱞᱤᱥᱤ ᱢᱮᱱᱟᱜᱼᱟ᱾ ᱱᱚᱶᱟ ᱢᱮᱯ ᱱᱚᱶᱟ ᱯᱨᱚᱥᱮᱥ ᱮ ᱩᱫᱩᱜ ᱥᱚᱫᱚᱨᱮᱫᱟ ᱟᱨ ᱮᱰᱤᱴᱚᱨ ᱟᱨ ᱮᱰᱢᱤᱱ ᱵᱟᱱᱟᱨ ᱞᱟᱹᱜᱤᱫ ᱚᱴᱚᱢᱮᱥᱚᱱ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱫᱟᱣ ᱠᱚ ᱪᱤᱱᱦᱟᱹᱣ ᱨᱮᱭᱟᱜ ᱠᱩᱨᱩᱢᱩᱴᱩᱭᱮᱫᱟ᱾
