Morning -
All members are voting members...unless I've missed something?
Yes, the credit checking thing occurred to me but seemed a little excessive - plus it would complicate our obligations in terms of possible data protection (if it was part managed by staff) or I suspect would be really expensive.
I suppose what we need to demonstrate is that, say 'Joe Bloggs' is a) Is who he says he is (proof of photo ID) and b) Lives at the address he says he does (utility bill? Electoral roll?). If people pay from a verified paypal account the need to check is superseded, because Paypal requires all this information.
Finally, not sure whether we are strictly legally obliged or not is the point - even if we aren't, 'should we put some safeguard against entryism/vote fraud in place' is the premise on which I've been asked to raise the issue.
Kat
On 19 November 2012 17:15, Harry Burt harryaburt@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Katherine Bavage < katherine.bavage@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
Hey Harry,
I'm not sure if ii) *is* easier. Compare the work of verifying members before every AGM and EGM or merely at the point of joining.
We don't really have formal check on membership at the moment - no applicant is asked to prove their residency at their address of that they have provided their real name.
It depends, I suppose, on what kind of check you have in mind. I was imagining "show us proof of identity" (with a large burden on the information supplier) rather than a cheap automated check. By "cheap" I also mean monetarily: it's probably not a good use of WMUK money verifying the addresses of non-voting members if WMUK is not legally obliged to.
Harry (User:Jarry1250)
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org