the contactbox wrote:
Whilst discussing membership, there is one group who may have a problem worth considering.
Wikipedia encourages editor privacy. This is built into every policy, so much so that Checkuser is not accessible without at least two checkusers to monitor each others' actions. Personal information is very well protected, for many good reasons, and on the whole this works well and is core policy on all Wikimedia-operated sites.
Some of our best editors prefer to work anonymously. In my case for example, I edit on controversial articles, and I'm listed as an admin (and editor of several years standing) willing to make difficult blocks where vicious personal attack may arise on and offline. I've been involved in blocks of vandals who have pursued other editors offline into their daily activities and professional lives in revenge, and I have had a stalker on Wikipedia who has made libellous claims..... all of which is water of a ducks back that I don't have a concern over, and doesn't influence editing and mediating as seems most appropriate within Wikipedia ... because no public link to an offline ID is provided.
I don't know the situation with UK (or England and Wales?) law, but at least on the Italian chapter the list of members is not public. On the members only part of the website http://www.wikimedia.it/ we have a list of members, but most of them only appear with their wiki nickname, so their privacy is not violated. Real names are known only by the board members (or maybe only by the treasurer) but there's no need to make them public.
Cruccone