-----Original Message----- From: wikimediauk-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikimediauk-l- bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Walker Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 10:02 AM To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Editors' exclusion due to privacy
On 6/29/07, Gordon Joly gordon.joly@pobox.com wrote:
I don't get it.
There is no need to disclose your online identity when registering as a member of the charity (a company limited by guarantee).
So me [User:LoopZilla] and me "Gordon Joly" are distinct. I have chosen to link them up, but I didn't need to.
Companies House has no idea that the person who is a director of two companies (one is a charity) is also [User:LoopZilla] on several Mediawikis.
Gordo
We've set things up with exactly this in mind Gordon - to become a member of the company (to vote at general meetings, become a board member, pay a pound to any creditors if we are wound up, etc.) you will need to provide your identity but not any on-line personality. In the case where you cannot join the company (if you are too young, won't provide a real identity etc.) you can still be considered a member of the chapter (and a supporter of WER). It's not necessary to provide any information about any on-line pseudonyms in either case.
I think the suggestion on this thread is to attempt to find a way for people to influence the company by having a vote at general meetings without providing any identity. This is what Alison is discussing.
Cheers,
Andrew
Thanks for two reasonably reassuring replies. If there are a sensible number of members then a userbox on Wikipedia user page "This person is a member of Wikimedia UK" doesn't ID a specific person. I'm thinking of people who will want to 1/ declare support and involvement openly on their user pages, whilst 2/ remaining not personally identified. This becomes possible if there are a fair number of members, such that matching up becomes impractical to do for most people.
As to your last point, yes, but not in a malicious or improper way. Rather, in the same sense that many editors wish to have an "influence" and show support on articles and processes on Wikimedia Foundation websites "without providing any identity". My question in this thread has been more, how can a person wishing to remain anonymous to ill-wishers on wiki*.org achieve that without exclusion from support to the company as a member. "Anonymity through obscurity" is rarely ideal; the search for another method seems worthwhile.