Off topic, but why does my email appear to be coming from the bounces address with "on Behalf of Dan Rosenthal" in the title? Is something broken on my end?
-Dan On Jul 28, 2007, at 8:33 PM, Casey Brown wrote:
How many cases there were... What were the accusations... (nothing specific i.e. what sort of abuse) Where they all solved... (how fast?) What were the threats...
There are many other possible questions as well. It is best to see what the Ombudsman themselves share.
Casey Brown Cbrown1023
-----Original Message----- From: foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Dan Rosenthal Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2007 7:47 PM To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] checkuser
On Jul 28, 2007, at 7:13 PM, elisabeth bauer wrote:
2007/7/29, Florence Devouard Anthere9@yahoo.com:
Greetings,
I got several requests about this, so this mail is mostly to get the ball rolling. Nothing urgent !
Checkuser ombudsmen have been appointed now a year ago by the board. http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/ Resolution:Ombudsperson_checkuser
I guess it is time for a renewal and little feedback on this, and more generally, on checkusers.
So, please reflect on the following points if appropriate
I'd like to add one point: Could the ombudsmen please provide a report on the mailing list (without going into private details of course) how many cases they have handled, what have been the issues and how they have been resolved?
greetings, elian
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I can't see why that would be necessary. Considering the ombudsman commission is there to investigate breaches of privacy policy, including potentionally litigious instances (as taken from the resolution), I don't see what's necessary out of that for the public to be aware of. I don't see much information would be available to be given about the cases individually due to privacy concerns: what little information would be left is what...how many cases there are?
-Dan Rosenthal
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I can't speak for the list admins, but that's how most mailman lists generally are setup.
-Josh
On 7/28/07, Dan Rosenthal swatjester@gmail.com wrote:
Off topic, but why does my email appear to be coming from the bounces address with "on Behalf of Dan Rosenthal" in the title? Is something broken on my end?
-Dan On Jul 28, 2007, at 8:33 PM, Casey Brown wrote:
How many cases there were... What were the accusations... (nothing specific i.e. what sort of abuse) Where they all solved... (how fast?) What were the threats...
There are many other possible questions as well. It is best to see what the Ombudsman themselves share.
Casey Brown Cbrown1023
-----Original Message----- From: foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Dan Rosenthal Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2007 7:47 PM To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] checkuser
On Jul 28, 2007, at 7:13 PM, elisabeth bauer wrote:
2007/7/29, Florence Devouard Anthere9@yahoo.com:
Greetings,
I got several requests about this, so this mail is mostly to get the ball rolling. Nothing urgent !
Checkuser ombudsmen have been appointed now a year ago by the board. http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/ Resolution:Ombudsperson_checkuser
I guess it is time for a renewal and little feedback on this, and more generally, on checkusers.
So, please reflect on the following points if appropriate
I'd like to add one point: Could the ombudsmen please provide a report on the mailing list (without going into private details of course) how many cases they have handled, what have been the issues and how they have been resolved?
greetings, elian
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I can't see why that would be necessary. Considering the ombudsman commission is there to investigate breaches of privacy policy, including potentionally litigious instances (as taken from the resolution), I don't see what's necessary out of that for the public to be aware of. I don't see much information would be available to be given about the cases individually due to privacy concerns: what little information would be left is what...how many cases there are?
-Dan Rosenthal
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Jul 28, 2007, at 9:43 PM, Joshua Brady wrote:
I can't speak for the list admins, but that's how most mailman lists generally are setup.
-Josh
On 7/28/07, Dan Rosenthal swatjester@gmail.com wrote:
Off topic, but why does my email appear to be coming from the bounces address with "on Behalf of Dan Rosenthal" in the title? Is something broken on my end?
-Dan On Jul 28, 2007, at 8:33 PM, Casey Brown wrote:
How many cases there were... What were the accusations... (nothing specific i.e. what sort of abuse) Where they all solved... (how fast?) What were the threats...
There are many other possible questions as well. It is best to see what the Ombudsman themselves share.
Casey Brown Cbrown1023
-----Original Message----- From: foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Dan Rosenthal Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2007 7:47 PM To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] checkuser
On Jul 28, 2007, at 7:13 PM, elisabeth bauer wrote:
2007/7/29, Florence Devouard Anthere9@yahoo.com:
Greetings,
I got several requests about this, so this mail is mostly to get the ball rolling. Nothing urgent !
Checkuser ombudsmen have been appointed now a year ago by the board. http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/ Resolution:Ombudsperson_checkuser
I guess it is time for a renewal and little feedback on this, and more generally, on checkusers.
So, please reflect on the following points if appropriate
I'd like to add one point: Could the ombudsmen please provide a report on the mailing list (without going into private details of course) how many cases they have handled, what have been the issues and how they have been resolved?
greetings, elian
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I can't see why that would be necessary. Considering the ombudsman commission is there to investigate breaches of privacy policy, including potentionally litigious instances (as taken from the resolution), I don't see what's necessary out of that for the public to be aware of. I don't see much information would be available to be given about the cases individually due to privacy concerns: what little information would be left is what...how many cases there are?
-Dan Rosenthal
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Weird cause see yours shows up like this:
On 7/28/07, Dan Rosenthal swatjester@gmail.com wrote:
Off topic, but...
But the other one showed up like this:
-----Original Message----- From: foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Dan Rosenthal
It's just strange, I've never seen that before on any of the lists.
-Dan
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org