Hi all,
Thanks for bringing this up. As you can imagine, we've been considering this on an ongoing basis as well as specifically after the recent shootings—and as Philippe and Gnangarra have pointed out, there are good reasons we can't share complete specifics. Still, here's a bit on our current strategy.
First, from an office perspective: we recently moved to a new building (as was discussed here earlier), and the change is a significant improvement from a security perspective. I will personally admit to some concerns in how difficult the last one was to secure, but the new one has a multiple person security team on duty 24/7. They have a complete plan for threats to the building, including active shooters or bomb threats. They work closely with us and have helped to train a group of staff to help in the case of emergency. In addition, we've started looking at additional staff training options after the recent attacks (one example is https://www.alicetraining.com/, though we're looking at multiple).
Second, I'm sure many of you know Support & Safety's emergency@wikimedia.org system[1], which also plays an important role here. We have close relationships with both the FBI and the local police department, and when we receive reports such as Vito linked (threats to the office, to others, or to themselves) we evaluate based on criteria we've worked with the FBI on and pass even remotely credible/imminent threats to the appropriate authorities quickly. Having dealt with a number of threats against the office and against others, I have seen the quick and professional response we get.
Third, events. These are obviously a bit more complicated, since it's hard to give blanket advice when specific policies are very venue specific. That said, this has been an increasing and ongoing focus of ours. While these kinds of threats are rare for us, they are important to think about before they happen. So far this work has included training modules[2] and a new handy booklet for organizers that we're creating which will be shared and tested with affiliates at the Wikimedia Conference in Berlin later this month. Both in these materials and elsewhere, we've always recommended that organizers get to know the security and management of their venue and that's especially important when thinking about threats of harm at an event. The first line of defense will be venue support and the local law enforcement (911, 999 etc) but emergency@ will also be available to help guide event organizers in crisis situations like that.
James
1. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Threats_of_harm 2. https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/training/support-and-safety/keeping-ev...
*James Alexander* Manager, Trust & Safety Wikimedia Foundation
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 9:01 PM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
en:wp has a very good concept https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Don%27t_stuff_beans_up_your_nose
" In our zeal to head off others' unwise action, we may put forth ideas they have not entertained before. It may be wise not to caution against such possibilities <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivation#Incentive_
theories:_intrinsic_and_extrinsic_motivation>
. Prophylactic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophylactic admonition may trigger novel mischief. As the popular saying goes, "don't give 'em
any
ideas". In other words, "
On 6 April 2018 at 10:34, Philippe Beaudette philippe@beaudette.me wrote:
I can not speak to current practice at the WMF, but I can speak to practice when I was there (ancient history, long ago, I know) when I say that this is something that was carefully considered and there were appropriate experts consulted at the time. Knowing the team there like i do, I'm confident that those plans have not lapsed, and that they
continue
to give appropriate (though not paranoiac) consideration to the realities of the world.
I also know that when I was there, we would have considered it inappropriate to share detail about those plans publicly, and I continue
to
believe that is good practice.
Philippe
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 5:19 PM, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l < wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
Safety of attendees has for a long time been a criteria ... agree, but the risk assesement we are discussing here is not about safety, but security. I am sure we might not use them all properly, I am also not a native English speaker, but they are not the same concept, right?
Now, there were examples where looking at a dossier where the
information
was about only the first one... that's the point here. I am talking
about
events, the first email was about the place of the office... but the motivation of a criminal act in both case can be overlapping, so they
are
an unicum in a proper evaluation, IMHO. I am not expert in the field,
but
if you start to assess the risk of someone harming you in SFO, that
could
happen also in another place where many of the same people gather
annually,
and that you also inform millions of people with sitenotices about it.
Now, I don't say that you must inform a lot. But if you are not the police you are also not the fire brigade, but you wouldn't write in a candidature nothing or simply "if there is a fire someone is paid to extinguish it"... you would make more effort, and we do. If you don't
want
to add another paragraph in the final document, rename it "safety and security" but start to think organically about it.
Alex
Il Venerdì 6 Aprile 2018 1:59, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com> hascritto:
Safety of attendees has for a long time been a criteria that needs to
be
addressed when bidding for any WMF event, the people bidding are the
better
placed to assess the reality of the local situation. Open bidding processes enable others to also critically look at the options,
ultimately
we are more at risk at home where feel comfortable then when travelling. Every location has its risks, its undesirables, and crime, just
getting a
taxi to and from the airport is a risk reality is its also more likely
than
a terrorist event On 6 April 2018 at 03:24, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l < wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
That's why people offwiki say they don't discuss this thing on meta or here, because you always have an "answer" like this... this sarcasm. in it's way, an example of an unhealthy community.
Look at what I wrote:
"Even if it is not nice to think about it, and of course you try to do
it
mostly in private, you should clearly write down at least at a certain point that you are preparing to all scenario, contacting the police and
so
on. it should be a paragraph in a candidature for an event, IMHO. but it should be done." that's it. it's not complicated... I know because of partially direct experience... it's part of the world, when you are professional. You
can't
prepare an event of certain scale and in a certain areas and ignore it
in
the final dossier. There will be someone who take a look at that. So,
who
talked about "solving terrorism"? just the one who wanted to make a
joke.
Maybe people are not big babies and even without constant reminder they don't exaggerate. You have no idea with whom I discuss this aspect so
far,
what such wikimedians do in their real life. They are able to focus on
the
point... the point is security and if you replied this way to this
question
in many situations, you will be considered unprepared.
Alex
Il Giovedì 5 Aprile 2018 20:29, Alphos OGame <alphos.ogame@gmail.com>
ha scritto:
I heartily agree : build that firewall, and let Cisco pay for it ! Wait, what were you suggesting in your incipit ? Oh, right, "a way
that's
rational, avoiding to create unnecessary panic of course". I'd rather not ask of people organizing conventions (which is already time-consuming by itself) that they solve terrorism in their town,
which is
what the police are probably more suited for, if you don't mind ; as a matter of fact, it is not one of their duties as convention holders,
plain
and simple, and neither are they doctors, police officers, judges,
jesters,
masseuses, nannies, yoga instructors, cooks, indentured servants, etc (except of course if they are, which may happen).
So let's please not overreact, and stick to the current discussion instead of having the next WikiConvention in a flying fortress with
armed
guards, sniffing dogs, and metal detectors at every door…
Roger / Alphos
2018-04-05 18:40 GMT+02:00 Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia. org>:
I remember we discussed 2 or 3 years about this scenario with some wikimedians off wiki. I strongly support to discuss at least once openly about that. In a way that it's rational, avoiding to create unnecessary panic... of course.
Despite the claimed neutrality of the communities, reality always bites. Now, a terrorist can imagine that we will not put a black banner if
someone
kill a lot of people somewhere... but if same amount of wikimedians are killed at a international rally the probability that a block ribbon, an editnotice with a statement appear on many language edition is higher.
it's
an attack at the community like it is a proposal of a law somewhere,
and we
naturally react stronger.
It would be a bigger impact, if you think about it. You can get the attention of billions of people every time they connect to the 5th or
6th
largest website in the world. Cynically speaking, if you also consider
the
facts that it's about free knowledge and volunteers, than a mass murder
at
at a wikimedian event might be more "effective" than at a discotheque or the seat of a multinational conglomerate.
If i remember correctly. in the months before a certain wiki-event, many people linked to radical activities were arrested in the area, in the
same
country. So, when you organize an event, it's not just about safety but also security. Even if it is not nice to think about it, and of course
you
try to do it mostly in private, you should clearly write down at least
at a
certain point that you are preparing to all scenario, contacting the
police
and so on. it should be a paragraph in a candidature for an event, IMHO. but it should be done.
A.M.
Il Giovedì 5 Aprile 2018 18:09, Vi to <vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com> hascritto:
I read/receive related craps <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/ index.php?title=User_talk: Vituzzu&diff=prev&oldid= 831949995> on a daily basis but it's hard to tell an idiot from a psychopath, so it
may
become a risk for WMF offices.
Vito
2018-04-05 17:33 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk:
I'm sure most of you will be aware of the unfortunate events at YouTube's HQ a couple fo days ago:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ YouTube_headquarters_shooting
Without giving away anything that might reveal vulnerabilities, does the WMF have contingency plans for such an incident? What about at community events in the US, and elsewhere?
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
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@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@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@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@lists.wikimedia. org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@ lists.wikimedia.org?subject= unsubscribe>
-- GN. Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.comOut now: A.Gaynor, P. Newman and P. Jennings (eds.), Never Again: Reflections on Environmental Responsibility after Roe 8, UWAP, 2017. Order here.
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik i/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- GN. Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com Out now: A.Gaynor, P. Newman and P. Jennings (eds.), *Never Again: Reflections on Environmental Responsibility after Roe 8*, UWAP, 2017. Order here https://uwap.uwa.edu.au/products/never-again- reflections-on-environmental-responsibility-after-roe-8 . _______________________________________________ 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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe