Using WMF employee accounts and employee personal accounts in the same community discussions

List overview All Threads
Download

newer

older

The Signpost – Volume 13, Issue 3...

WMF advanced permissions for...

Fæ

27 Feb 2017 27 Feb '17

5:32 p.m.

Could someone with an appropriate level of managerial authority within the WMF, such as an HR manager, confirm that staff accounts, which are supposed to be identified with "(WMF)", are intended to be used for an employee's job or contract role, rather than for personal editing and publishing personal views? I ask this question after a long term employee has recently caused confusion in a consensus building discussion, but refuses to stick to one account when voting and expressing their personal views, making this not a legitimate use of a staff account as this is outside of their employed role. As the personal and employee accounts would appear to most participants to represent the views of two separate people, this can be judged as a breach of the local policy on sockpuppet accounts, as well as a misuse of a staff account. I'm raising this here as the local policy appears insufficient to convince the WMF employee that they are not using multiple accounts in a legitimate way, consequently a clearer statement from the WMF may help to refine the wording of the sockpuppet policy on the Mediawiki project, and help decide whether it can apply to WMF employees in the same way it already applies to unpaid volunteer contributors. Links 1. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_Conduct/Draft#WMF_employees_con… 2. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Sock_puppetry 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sock_puppetry#Legitimate_uses Thanks, Fae -- faewik(a)gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

Show replies by date

Adrian Raddatz

27 Feb 27 Feb

6:11 p.m.

Oh please. It might be a bit confusing, but there's no huge issue here. You could have just asked the person to remain on one account, rather than accuse him of sockpuppetry and ask an admin to block him if it continues. I'd call that a rule of basic interaction in an online setting - be curtious. On Feb 27, 2017 9:32 AM, "Fæ" <faewik(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

Could someone with an appropriate level of managerial authority within the WMF, such as an HR manager, confirm that staff accounts, which are supposed to be identified with "(WMF)", are intended to be used for an employee's job or contract role, rather than for personal editing and publishing personal views? I ask this question after a long term employee has recently caused confusion in a consensus building discussion, but refuses to stick to one account when voting and expressing their personal views, making this not a legitimate use of a staff account as this is outside of their employed role. As the personal and employee accounts would appear to most participants to represent the views of two separate people, this can be judged as a breach of the local policy on sockpuppet accounts, as well as a misuse of a staff account. I'm raising this here as the local policy appears insufficient to convince the WMF employee that they are not using multiple accounts in a legitimate way, consequently a clearer statement from the WMF may help to refine the wording of the sockpuppet policy on the Mediawiki project, and help decide whether it can apply to WMF employees in the same way it already applies to unpaid volunteer contributors. Links 1. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_Conduct/ Draft#WMF_employees_confusingly_using_personal_and_staff_accounts_in_the_ same_consensus_building_discussion 2. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Sock_puppetry 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sock_puppetry#Legitimate_uses Thanks, Fae -- faewik(a)gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Fæ

6:17 p.m.

They have been repeatedly asked to stick to one account and refused to do so. I suggest you read the other contributions from the account(s) on the same page. Having an improved sockpuppeting policy would clear up any future confusion by WMF employees or those that happen to interact with their multiple accounts in discussions. However improvement here would be made a lot easier if WMF HR stated what was their expected mixed usage of accounts labelled "(WMF)" and personal accounts by the same employee in the same discussion. Fae On 27 February 2017 at 18:11, Adrian Raddatz <ajraddatz(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

Could someone with an appropriate level of managerial authority within the WMF, such as an HR manager, confirm that staff accounts, which are supposed to be identified with "(WMF)", are intended to be used for an employee's job or contract role, rather than for personal editing and publishing personal views? I ask this question after a long term employee has recently caused confusion in a consensus building discussion, but refuses to stick to one account when voting and expressing their personal views, making this not a legitimate use of a staff account as this is outside of their employed role. As the personal and employee accounts would appear to most participants to represent the views of two separate people, this can be judged as a breach of the local policy on sockpuppet accounts, as well as a misuse of a staff account. I'm raising this here as the local policy appears insufficient to convince the WMF employee that they are not using multiple accounts in a legitimate way, consequently a clearer statement from the WMF may help to refine the wording of the sockpuppet policy on the Mediawiki project, and help decide whether it can apply to WMF employees in the same way it already applies to unpaid volunteer contributors. Links 1. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_Conduct/ Draft#WMF_employees_confusingly_using_personal_and_staff_accounts_in_the_ same_consensus_building_discussion 2. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Sock_puppetry 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sock_puppetry#Legitimate_uses Thanks, Fae -- faewik(a)gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

-- faewik(a)gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

Adrian Raddatz

6:22 p.m.

A very, very small improvement to be sure. I think the guy in question gets at it when he says that he was no longer using paid time to contribute to the discussion. Mods, do you intentionally let the list be used as a platform for this constant flow of "omg the wmf is eeeeeviiiiilllll"? I seems to recall hearing about days when useful discussions happened here. On Feb 27, 2017 10:18 AM, "Fæ" <faewik(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

Oh please. It might be a bit confusing, but there's no huge issue here.

You

could have just asked the person to remain on one account, rather than accuse him of sockpuppetry and ask an admin to block him if it continues. I'd call that a rule of basic interaction in an online setting - be curtious. On Feb 27, 2017 9:32 AM, "Fæ" <faewik(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Could someone with an appropriate level of managerial authority within > the WMF, such as an HR manager, confirm that staff accounts, which are > supposed to be identified with "(WMF)", are intended to be used for an > employee's job or contract role, rather than for personal editing and > publishing personal views? > > I ask this question after a long term employee has recently caused > confusion in a consensus building discussion, but refuses to stick to > one account when voting and expressing their personal views, making > this not a legitimate use of a staff account as this is outside of > their employed role. As the personal and employee accounts would > appear to most participants to represent the views of two separate > people, this can be judged as a breach of the local policy on > sockpuppet accounts, as well as a misuse of a staff account. > > I'm raising this here as the local policy appears insufficient to > convince the WMF employee that they are not using multiple accounts in > a legitimate way, consequently a clearer statement from the WMF may > help to refine the wording of the sockpuppet policy on the Mediawiki > project, and help decide whether it can apply to WMF employees in the > same way it already applies to unpaid volunteer contributors. > > Links > 1. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_Conduct/ > Draft#WMF_employees_confusingly_using_personal_

and_staff_accounts_in_the_

> same_consensus_building_discussion > 2. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Sock_puppetry > 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sock_puppetry#

Legitimate_uses

Thanks, Fae -- faewik(a)gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/

wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l

New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> -- faewik(a)gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Olatunde Isaac

6:30 p.m.

New subject: Using WMF employee accounts and employee personal accounts in the same community discussions

Well, I don't think the WMF staffer is acting in bad faith but I do think they need to stick to a single account to avoid confusion. That being said, I don't think a discussion like this is necessary here. Best, Isaac Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless handheld from Glo Mobile. -----Original Message----- From: Adrian Raddatz <ajraddatz(a)gmail.com> Sender: "Wikimedia-l" <wikimedia-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org>Datet;Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 10:22:54 To: Wikimedia Mailing List<wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Reply-To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Using WMF employee accounts and employee personal accounts in the same community discussions A very, very small improvement to be sure. I think the guy in question gets at it when he says that he was no longer using paid time to contribute to the discussion. Mods, do you intentionally let the list be used as a platform for this constant flow of "omg the wmf is eeeeeviiiiilllll"? I seems to recall hearing about days when useful discussions happened here. On Feb 27, 2017 10:18 AM, "Fæ" <faewik(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

Oh please. It might be a bit confusing, but there's no huge issue here.

You

and_staff_accounts_in_the_

> same_consensus_building_discussion > 2. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Sock_puppetry > 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sock_puppetry#

Legitimate_uses

_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/

wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l

New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Lodewijk

28 Feb 28 Feb

12:54 a.m.

I don't see that reasoning at all, actually. If roles are clearly separate, having separate accounts is justifiable in my opinion. When doing so in a way that could suggest larger support for a proposal than is actually the case, it could make sense to make the connection explicit in a disclosure (unless the connection is obvious). After all, that is the main reason why communities have a problem with sockpuppetry. In general it would be good to stay away with your personal account from staff discussions and vice versa - although roles can change, and the interest in a topic can remain after a job is finished. Buut in such cases, disclosure may be needed. I'm not sure why Fae is asking this question through this venue though - but that is a discussion I recall from a week or so ago, so he's probably aware of that. Lodewijk 2017-02-27 19:30 GMT+01:00 Olatunde Isaac <reachout2isaac(a)gmail.com>om>:

...

wrote:

Oh please. It might be a bit confusing, but there's no huge issue here.

You > could have just asked the person to remain on one account, rather than > accuse him of sockpuppetry and ask an admin to block him if it

continues.

I'd call that a rule of basic interaction in an online setting - be curtious. On Feb 27, 2017 9:32 AM, "Fæ" <faewik(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Could someone with an appropriate level of managerial authority within > the WMF, such as an HR manager, confirm that staff accounts, which are > supposed to be identified with "(WMF)", are intended to be used for an > employee's job or contract role, rather than for personal editing and > publishing personal views? > > I ask this question after a long term employee has recently caused > confusion in a consensus building discussion, but refuses to stick to > one account when voting and expressing their personal views, making > this not a legitimate use of a staff account as this is outside of > their employed role. As the personal and employee accounts would > appear to most participants to represent the views of two separate > people, this can be judged as a breach of the local policy on > sockpuppet accounts, as well as a misuse of a staff account. > > I'm raising this here as the local policy appears insufficient to > convince the WMF employee that they are not using multiple accounts in > a legitimate way, consequently a clearer statement from the WMF may > help to refine the wording of the sockpuppet policy on the Mediawiki > project, and help decide whether it can apply to WMF employees in the > same way it already applies to unpaid volunteer contributors. > > Links > 1. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_Conduct/ > Draft#WMF_employees_confusingly_using_personal_

and_staff_accounts_in_the_

> same_consensus_building_discussion > 2. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Sock_puppetry > 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sock_puppetry#

Legitimate_uses >> >> Thanks, >> Fae >> -- >> faewik(a)gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ >> wiki/Wikimedia-l >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/

wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l

New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Fæ

27 Feb 27 Feb

6:35 p.m.

Please try to avoid turning legitimate questions for the WMF into parodies. The WMF is not evil, nor have emails in this thread made anything like that type of ridiculous allegation. This topic is in-scope for Wikimedia-l as defined by "Organizational issues of the Wikimedia Foundation, chapter organizations, others" and is not an issue that is easily resolved on a local on-wiki noticeboard, but an issue of WMF account usage which potentially affects all Wikimedia projects. Thanks, Fae On 27 February 2017 at 18:22, Adrian Raddatz <ajraddatz(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

Oh please. It might be a bit confusing, but there's no huge issue here.

You

and_staff_accounts_in_the_

> same_consensus_building_discussion > 2. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Sock_puppetry > 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sock_puppetry#

Legitimate_uses

_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/

wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l

New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

-- faewik(a)gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae