On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Amgine <amgine@wikimedians.ca> wrote:

On 09/07/13 12:41 PM, Luis Villa wrote:
> I discussed this a bit yesterday in the talk page and will flesh
> that out more, but the specific concern (raised here, on the blog,
> and in the talk page) is that stopwatching is too US-focused. When
> counting those concerns as anti-stopwatching votes, the ratio
> appears more balanced (and the numbers are quite small, as well).

While I'm hardly likely to be accused of being an interventionist, how
does "Don't be US-centric" equate with "Don't do anything"?

It does not! I think it is more like:

1. Don't sign stopwatching.us, or do anything else too US-focused.

2. Internally, do be careful with (or as necessary improve) WMF's own privacy processes.

3. Externally, do (unspecified something).

For #2, see the discussion on the privacy policy revision: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Privacy_policy/Call_for_input_%282013%29

For #3, we're still very open to doing that unspecified something. We just don't see any consensus on what the unspecified something is, other than "not something US-focused".

So please, we're definitely open to anything around #3 that can get consensus, like (say) James' suggestion that we promote prism-break. We would actively *like* to do that (several people here have signed various petitions as individuals, for example). We just don't see what that is yet.

Hope that helps clarify-

Luis

Luis Villa
Deputy General Counsel
Wikimedia Foundation
415.839.6885 ext. 6810

NOTICE: This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you have received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity.