[Foundation-l] Fwd: Have you dealt with this yet? If so,how? - Wikimedia-l

27 Nov 2008

      ---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: dee dee strategicdesign2001@yahoo.com
Date: Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 4:14 PM
Subject: Have you dealt with this yet? If so,how?
To: foundation-l-owner@lists.wikimedia.org
I think the overall project ( Wikimedia Foundation) may have substantial
responsibility and negative exposure in this matter whether the En.WP
"community" or even Mr. Wales has a problem with it or not. Exposure
in the areas of privacy expectations and rules as well as misrepresentation (the
conflict between the stated checkuser protocol and the actual more secretive
protocol). Therefore, you have a responsibility for Wikimedia which requires
your involvement in addressing this protocol on EnWP which, according to the
En.WP "community" itself, -see below-, is casual,arbitrary and
publicly misleading.
So I think the very least the Foundation should do is have your
(Wikimedia's) legal department look at the
 situation.
--- On Sun, 11/23/08, Birgitte SB birgitte_sb@yahoo.com wrote:
...
From: Birgitte SB birgitte_sb@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Have you dealt with this yet? If so,how?
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
...
Cc: strategicdesign2001@yahoo.com
Date: Sunday, November 23, 2008, 12:54 PM
This is more of an en.WP issue not a foundation one.  En.WP
can change local policy to require that checkuser requests
are logged on-wiki if that is what the community wants.
Various wikis have different policies regarding these
issues.  I don't see why we should debate en.WP's
particular version of policy here.
Brigitte SB
--- On Sun, 11/23/08, Foundation-l list admin
foundation-l-owner@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
...
From:
Foundation-l list admin
...
foundation-l-owner@lists.wikimedia.org
...
Subject: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Have you dealt with this
yet? If so,how?
...
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
...
Date: Sunday, November 23, 2008, 11:06 AM
(2nd try, hope it isn't a duplicate)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: dee dee strategicdesign2001@yahoo.com
Date: Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 5:06 PM
Subject: Have you dealt with this yet? If so,how?
To: foundation-l-owner@lists.wikimedia.org
Four brief points:
1: I think the primary issue here is the appearance
that
...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
gives to the community and the public of a
completely
...
...
transparent and
open Checkuser request process when the discussions
have
...
shown that,as
Thatcher131said,
"The vast majority of checks are run following
talk
...
page, email or IRC
requests to the checkusers. WP:RFCU is a
backup;.."
...
or as JzG|Guy said at
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%2...
...
...
"The vast majority of checkuser requests are, and
always have been,
performed quietly and without a request at RFCU."
At the very,very least there should be an
acknowledgement
...
at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
that there is also a
parallel "back
...
...
channel"(Guy's phraseology) method
of requesting and processing CHECKUSER activity which
is
...
not
transparent to the general Wikipedia community nor the
public.
2: In addition, this section of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
"Privacy violation?

If you feel that a checkuser has led to a

violation of
...
the
Wikimedia Foundation privacy policy regarding
yourself,
...
please refer
the case to the Ombudsman commission."
is something I find to be quite Orwellian. How can
someone
...
report a
privacy violation if they do not know that checkuser
has
...
been used on
them?
3: A third
aspect is that it seems these
...
...
"private" Checkuser checks
are being used frivolously on brand new Users to
effect 1
...
second
blocks for "scrutiny" reasons and the
Checkuser
...
usage is being so
poorly documented that sometimes no one even knows who
used
...
the tool
as shown here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive...
...
...
Therefore, there should also be full disclosure to all
new
...
Users that
Checkuser could be used without their knowledge on the
basis of
suspicion at any time after  they open a Wikipedia
account.
...
4: I also think User Risker's comments about the
privacy aspect have merit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%2...
...
...
--- On Tue, 12/11/07, dee dee
strategicdesign2001@yahoo.com wrote:
...
From: dee dee
strategicdesign2001@yahoo.com
...
...
Subject: Re: Jimbo's response re:Rampant
Checkuser
...
Privacy Abuse
...
To: foundation-l-owner@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Tuesday, December 11, 2007, 9:06 PM
Four brief points:
1: I think the primary issue here is the
appearance
...
that
...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
gives to the community and the public of a
completely
...
...
transparent and open Checkuser request process
when
...
the
...
...
...
discussions have shown that,as Thatcher131said,
"The vast majority of checks are run
following
...
talk
...
page, email or IRC requests to the checkusers.
WP:RFCU
...
is a
...
backup;.."
or as JzG|Guy said at
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%2...
...
...
...
"The vast majority of checkuser requests
are, and
...
...
always have been, performed quietly and without a
request at
...
RFCU."
At the very,very  least there should be an
acknowledgement
...
at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
...
...
that there is also a parallel "back
channel"(Guy's phraseology) method of
requesting
...
and processing CHECKUSER activity which is not
transparent
...
to the general Wikipedia community nor the
public.
...
...
2: In addition, this section of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
"Privacy violation?
* If you feel that a checkuser has led to a

violation
...
of the Wikimedia Foundation privacy policy
regarding
...
...
yourself, please refer the case to the Ombudsman
commission."
is something I find to be quite Orwellian. How
can
...
someone
...
report a privacy violation if they
do not know
...
that
...
...
checkuser has been used on them?
3: A third aspect is that it seems these
"private" Checkuser checks are being
used
...
...
frivolously on brand new Users to effect 1 second
blocks for
...
"scrutiny" reasons and the Checkuser
usage
...
is
...
being so poorly documented that sometimes no one
even
...
knows
...
who used the tool as shown here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive...
...
...
...
Therefore, there should also be full disclosure
to all
...
new
...
Users that Checkuser could be used without their
knowledge
...
on the basis of suspicion at any time after
they
...
open
...
a
...
Wikipedia account.
4: I also think User Risker's comments about
the
...
...
privacy aspect have merit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%2...
...
...
...
dee dee
Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote: In
English
...
...
Wikipedida, ArbCom is a good place to go  for
this
...
sort of
...
thing.
However, having reviewed checkuser policy, I see
absolutely
...
nothing even
close to a policy violation here.
"Notification to the account that is checked
is
...
permitted but is not
...
...
mandatory. Similarly, notification of the check
to the
...
...
community is not
mandatory, but may be done subject to the
provisions
...
of the
...
privacy policy."
I strongly support this element of the policy.
Cary Bass wrote:
...
dee dee wrote:
...
Hi, I think the Stewards have authority
in
...
this
...
matter. The Ombudsman
...
...
Commission seems to accept these
clandestine
...
...
Checkuser requests but I
...
...
doubt the Stewards will. I hope you will
forward
...
my message to them so
...
...
they can decide for themselves.
...
...
Hi again, dee dee.
...
Being a steward myself, I responded to you
in
...
that
...
capacity.  I'm sorry
...
my signature didn't indicate such, but
I'll
...
mention it again.
...
You seem to be mistaken about the function
of
...
...
stewards.  Why don't you
...
read the relevant page on meta, here:
The stewards have no authority over the
checkusers or
...
checkuser policy.
...
There is no steward committee, only a
mailing
...
list
...
where the stewards
...
can share their thoughts, actions, etc.
Where there is a local policy in place,
the
...
...
stewards
...
have no authority
...
over local policy.
Where there is a function policy in place
(like
...
...
checkuser), the stewards
...
have no authority over that function policy.
Short of suggestion you address it to the
local
...
Arbcom
...
or the Checkuser
...
Ombudsman Commission, there is nothing any
steward on
...
this list can do
...
for you.
foundation-l-owner@lists.wikimedia.org wrote: Due
to a
...
...
large amount of spam, emails from non-members of
this
...
list
...
are now automatically rejected. If you have a
valuable
...
...
contribution
to
...
...
...
the list but would rather not subscribe to it,
please
...
sent
...
an email to
foundation-l-owner@lists.wikimedia.org and we
will
...
forward
...
your post
to the list. Please be aware that all messages to
this
...
list
...
are
archived and viewable for the public. If you have
a
...
...
confidential
communication to make, please rather email
info@wikimedia.org
Thank you.
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:58:36 -0800 (PST)
From: dee dee
strategicdesign2001@yahoo.com
...
...
Subject: Rampant Checkuser Privacy Abuse
To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
In regards to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
...
...
''''Privacy violation?
If you feel that a checkuser has led to a
violation of
...
the
...
Wikimedia Foundation privacy policy regarding
yourself,
...
please refer the case to the Ombudsman
commission.''''
Please note that so-called "private"
uses of
...
...
checkuser are occurring and tolerated as seen
here:
...
...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#False_B...
...
...
...
How can someone report a privacy violation if
they do
...
not
...
know that checkuser has been used?
...
...

Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you
...
with
...
Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.

Never miss a thing.   Make Yahoo your homepage.
--
Michael Bimmler
mbimmler@gmail.com

foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- 
Michael Bimmler
mbimmler@gmail.com