For me the difference that matters is that they are part of the movement,
WMF and WMUK in accounts denote staff editors. Communicating that is
something I see as internal communication. There are lots of ways in which
we allow internal communication to do things that we would not allow
external organisations to promote within the project.
As for whether being a charity makes a difference; Personally I'm more
likely to talk rather than block an editor who was from a not for profit.
But our policy doesn't discriminate between charities and other external
organisations.
WSC
On 29 April 2012 15:31, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 29 April 2012 15:23, WereSpielChequers
<werespielchequers(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
If PR agency Acme PR were to start to employ a
bunch of spin doctors with
usernames such as "Millie C from Acme PR" then it would be obviously
promotional. Especially if they were active on wiki arguing that their
clients criminal records should be expunged or at least given less
coverage
than their charity work.
How is that different to having "(WMF)" or "(WMUK)" after your
username? There are several obvious differences (WMF/WMUK staff don't
usually edit article content, they are affiliated with Wikipedia, they
are non-profit, etc.), but I'm curious what, if any, difference you
think makes one ok and the other not.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK:
http://uk.wikimedia.org