Section 2. USER ACCOUNTS OF MEMBERS. All applicants for contributing or volunteer active membership shall maintain a user account on one or several Wikimedia projects (i.e. Wikipedia of any language, Wikibooks, etc.), complete and sign the form of application provided by the Foundation on it’s web site and submit the application the Secretary along with payment of the year’s membership dues, if applicable, through such web site or by mail. Such application shall include an agreement by the applicant to abide by the Foundation's Code of Ethics, submission standards and other policies as are time to time adopted or modified by the Board of Trustees.
Here are the following cases as regards participants
* participant using his real name as a user name (example Tim Starling) * participant using a pseudonyme as a user name, but whose real name is displayed on his user page or is generally known per mailing list (example Cimon) * participant using a pseudonyme as a user name, but whose real name is known only from a limited number of participants (I will avoid putting an example here) * participant using a pseudonyme as a user name, and whose real name is totally unknown of * participant per ip
Which ones may be members ?
if I understand well, it is impossible to become a member of the Foundation without exposing a real identity (full name etc), so anonymous members are not allowed.
If I continue to understand well, a person who cannot reveal a real identity can continue having a user account on Wikipedia or contribute as anonymous IP address.
Is my understanding right?
--Optim
--- Anthere anthere8@yahoo.com wrote:
Section 2. USER ACCOUNTS OF MEMBERS. All applicants for contributing or volunteer active membership shall maintain a user account on one or several Wikimedia projects (i.e. Wikipedia of any language, Wikibooks, etc.), complete and sign the form of application provided by the Foundation on it�s web site and submit the application the Secretary along with payment of the year�s membership dues, if applicable, through such web site or by mail. Such application shall include an agreement by the applicant to abide by the Foundation's Code of Ethics, submission standards and other policies as are time to time adopted or modified by the Board of Trustees.
Here are the following cases as regards participants
- participant using his real name as a user
name (example Tim Starling)
- participant using a pseudonyme as a user
name, but whose real name is displayed on his user page or is generally known per mailing list (example Cimon)
- participant using a pseudonyme as a user
name, but whose real name is known only from a limited number of participants (I will avoid putting an example here)
- participant using a pseudonyme as a user
name, and whose real name is totally unknown of
- participant per ip
Which ones may be members ?
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/
I have been wondering if it were not possible that someone provides the link between his real identity and his pseudonyme, and as such is allowed to be granted membership and voting rights under the real name.
This with keeping private the information.
After all, we accept donations, and agree to keep the names of the donators private. Why could not we just do that as well for the members ?
Then, as soon as the link between the two names is validated, the member is accepted for commenting and voting under his real name, without making his wikipeida identity known publicly.
Possible ?
Optim a écrit:
if I understand well, it is impossible to become a member of the Foundation without exposing a real identity (full name etc), so anonymous members are not allowed.
If I continue to understand well, a person who cannot reveal a real identity can continue having a user account on Wikipedia or contribute as anonymous IP address.
Is my understanding right?
--Optim
--- Anthere anthere8@yahoo.com wrote:
Section 2. USER ACCOUNTS OF MEMBERS. All applicants for contributing or volunteer active membership shall maintain a user account on one or several Wikimedia projects (i.e. Wikipedia of any language, Wikibooks, etc.), complete and sign the form of application provided by the Foundation on it’s web site and submit the application the Secretary along with payment of the year’s membership dues, if applicable, through such web site or by mail. Such application shall include an agreement by the applicant to abide by the Foundation's Code of Ethics, submission standards and other policies as are time to time adopted or modified by the Board of Trustees.
Here are the following cases as regards participants
- participant using his real name as a user
name (example Tim Starling)
- participant using a pseudonyme as a user
name, but whose real name is displayed on his user page or is generally known per mailing list (example Cimon)
- participant using a pseudonyme as a user
name, but whose real name is known only from a limited number of participants (I will avoid putting an example here)
- participant using a pseudonyme as a user
name, and whose real name is totally unknown of
- participant per ip
Which ones may be members ?
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/
Anthere wrote:
After all, we accept donations, and agree to keep the names of the donators private. Why could not we just do that as well for the members ?
Yes, I see good reason to permit people to select to have their name be held in confidence. And I see no harm in it.
--Jimbo
Optim wrote:
if I understand well, it is impossible to become a member of the Foundation without exposing a real identity (full name etc), so anonymous members are not allowed.
If I continue to understand well, a person who cannot reveal a real identity can continue having a user account on Wikipedia or contribute as anonymous IP address.
Is my understanding right?
That's right. As to what sort of procedure I ought to use to ensure that there is not rampant vote fraud from fake names (because even if I say you have to be a person and can only vote once, how am I to know without such absurdities as requiring identification), I'm open to suggestions.
But, in the best wiki spirit, my guess is that this will not be an appreciable problem. We will learn from experience, but mostly I think we can trust people to do the right thing.
--Jimbo
That's right. As to what sort of procedure I ought to use to ensure that there is not rampant vote fraud from fake names (because even if I say you have to be a person and can only vote once, how am I to know without such absurdities as requiring identification), I'm open to suggestions.
Membership is not designed to be anonymous: Article II sec. 2 states that to be a free or paying member you must submit an application of membership to the Secretary agreeing to abide by the Wikimedia Code of Ethics, submission standards and policies. It can be online or via mail. Paying members could submit their application via the internet, i.e. if they have a verified paypal account,
That process would seem to indicate that you could require the application to be verified by a notary, thus ensuring that it is from a distinct individual. That is usually what NPO membership coordinators due is verify membership status, so it is not outrageous to ask someone to fill out a form, get it notarized and mail it to someone to be entitled to vote.
Giving every user account the right to vote is obviously not an option if you are looking for some kind of legitimacy because one person could open hudreds or thousands of user accounts and capture the voting process that way. Anyone who gets elected to the free volunteer position on the Board will be subject to public scrutiny.
Anyone who is on the board must divulge their identity as it will be on the annual tax return that Wikimedia must send into the government each year that is a public document so if someone later discovers that they stuffed the ballot box that will be civil fraud (and maybe even a crime).
Maybe Wikimedia could adopt something along the lines of that federal electronic voting program that has been in the news lately: http://www.serveusa.gov/public/aca.aspx
Alex R. (en:user:alex756)
Alex T. wrote:
That process would seem to indicate that you could require the application to be verified by a notary, thus ensuring that it is from a distinct individual. That is usually what NPO membership coordinators due is verify membership status, so it is not outrageous to ask someone to fill out a form, get it notarized and mail it to someone to be entitled to vote.
It doesn't seem outrageous, no, but it does seem a bit of overkill esp. for the first year's elections. I would say that a bit of commonsense on my part will go a long way towards eliminating or at least minimizing any problems.
Giving every user account the right to vote is obviously not an option if you are looking for some kind of legitimacy because one person could open hudreds or thousands of user accounts and capture the voting process that way.
I agree with that 100%.
It doesn't seem too terribly difficult, though, for the Foundation to keep the identities of members reasonably private, though.
On Monday I will write up and post a proposed procedure for the voting, to be critiqued well-and-good I'm sure.
--Jimbo
Alex T. wrote:
That process would seem to indicate that you could require the application to be verified by a notary, thus ensuring that it is from a distinct individual. That is usually what NPO membership coordinators due is verify membership status, so it is not outrageous to ask someone to fill out a form, get it notarized and mail it to someone to be entitled to vote.
I personally don't like any notarization requirement, because not everyone has easy (and certainly not free) access to a notary public. In addition, I've actually never been a member of a NPO that required this, and I've been a member of several organizations that had votes. Perhaps it's different in the world of academic and professional societies (Cognitive Science Society, Association of Computing Machinery, IEEE, etc.), but they seem to consider the fact that they snail-mail you the materials to be a sufficient safeguard--if you tried to request 500 ballots to the same address, they'd notice and check into it, and it's unreasonably difficult for most people to stuff the ballot box by acquiring 500 different places at which they can receive mail. About half also additionally require either a photocopy of an ID or in the case of students or professors a letter from your institution saying "this guy really is a [student/professor] here".
-Mark
Delirium a écrit:
Alex T. wrote:
That process would seem to indicate that you could require the application to be verified by a notary, thus ensuring that it is from a distinct individual. That is usually what NPO membership coordinators due is verify membership status, so it is not outrageous to ask someone to fill out a form, get it notarized and mail it to someone to be entitled to vote.
A notary ?!? Well...I never had the use of a notary, even to receive an heritage :-( I suspect we will have to find easier ways to prove we are real citizens. Perhaps an id number, perhaps a copy of an official letter, perhaps a web site with enough standing references to prove we exist...
From: "Anthere" anthere8@yahoo.com
Delirium a écrit:
Alex T. wrote:
That process would seem to indicate that you could require the
application
to be verified by a notary, thus ensuring that it is from a distinct
individual.
That is usually what NPO membership coordinators due is verify membership status, so it
is
not outrageous to ask someone to fill out a form, get it notarized and mail
it
to someone to be entitled to vote.
A notary ?!? Well...I never had the use of a notary, even to receive an heritage :-(
Ant, in the United States a "Notary" is not the same this as a "Notaire" under the civil law. A Notary Public is someone who takes oaths and verifies the identities of individuals. They usually perform this service for a small sum, you can usually go to a public shop such as a pharmacy or perhaps a bank or savings and loan assocation or credit union and for a couple of dollars they will verify your identity. In Quebec we call this a "Commissioner of Oaths".
I suspect we will have to find easier ways to prove we are real citizens. Perhaps an id number, perhaps a copy of an official letter,
That is what it would be, basically a copy of an official statement that the person who signed this paper brought their picture ID to me and signed this document in front of me, very simple, really.
perhaps a web site with enough standing references to prove we exist...
VeriSign has some services along this line: http://www.verisign.com/products/asb/index.html
There are also online voter systems that exist: http://www.votenet.com/eballot/index_associations.html
Alex R. a écrit:
From: "Anthere" anthere8@yahoo.com
Delirium a écrit:
Alex T. wrote:
That process would seem to indicate that you could require the
application
to be verified by a notary, thus ensuring that it is from a distinct
individual.
That is usually what NPO membership coordinators due is verify membership status, so it
is
not outrageous to ask someone to fill out a form, get it notarized and mail
it
to someone to be entitled to vote.
A notary ?!? Well...I never had the use of a notary, even to receive an heritage :-(
Ant, in the United States a "Notary" is not the same this as a "Notaire" under the civil law. A Notary Public is someone who takes oaths and verifies the identities of individuals. They usually perform this service for a small sum, you can usually go to a public shop such as a pharmacy or perhaps a bank or savings and loan assocation or credit union and for a couple of dollars they will verify your identity. In Quebec we call this a "Commissioner of Oaths".
We have no such thing in France. We show our identity card, a copy is provided if necessary.
Until recently, we could go to the city hall, and have an official copy of it for case such as this one, but the practice is now bogus.
There is no other way to prove our identity than to show an identity card, or to request a birth statement from where we born. Which is rather infrequent.
Anthere wrote:
- participant using his real name as a user name (example Tim Starling)
- participant using a pseudonyme as a user name, but whose real name is
displayed on his user page or is generally known per mailing list (example Cimon)
- participant using a pseudonyme as a user name, but whose real name is
known only from a limited number of participants (I will avoid putting an example here)
- participant using a pseudonyme as a user name, and whose real name is
totally unknown of
- participant per ip
Only actual individual humans who submit a membership application, as per the bylaws can be members. The membership application should have a checkbox for those who wish to preserve their anonymity.
--Jimbo
Anthere wrote:
Section 2. USER ACCOUNTS OF MEMBERS. All applicants for contributing or volunteer active membership shall maintain a user account on one or several Wikimedia projects (i.e. Wikipedia of any language, Wikibooks, etc.), complete and sign the form of application provided by the Foundation on its web site and submit the application the Secretary along with payment of the years membership dues, if applicable, through such web site or by mail. Such application shall include an agreement by the applicant to abide by the Foundation's Code of Ethics, submission standards and other policies as are time to time adopted or modified by the Board of Trustees.
Here are the following cases as regards participants
- participant using his real name as a user name (example Tim Starling)
- participant using a pseudonyme as a user name, but whose real name
is displayed on his user page or is generally known per mailing list (example Cimon)
- participant using a pseudonyme as a user name, but whose real name
is known only from a limited number of participants (I will avoid putting an example here)
- participant using a pseudonyme as a user name, and whose real name
is totally unknown of
- participant per ip
Which ones may be members ?
It seems that the first four are all allowed. The user registration is what makes a person an active member. There is nothing preventing a person from using his ip number as though it were a name. A few people have already done that. This provison should really be integrated with the single sign up concept to avoid any implication that being signed up in more than one project means more than one vote. The biggest difficulty that I have with this section is that it relies on a number of ideas that have not yet been defined, such as the "Foundation's Code of Ethics".
Ec
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org