[Foundation-l] WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

David Gerard dgerard at gmail.com
Wed May 2 09:40:14 UTC 2007

On 02/05/07, Dmcdevit <dmcdevit at cox.net> wrote:
> Brad Patrick wrote:

> > 3) Will the Foundation fight?  That depends, but the clearest answer you
> > will get is, there is no guarantee of security, only the best anyone can
> >  offer.  Any other statement is hogwash.  If your identity is so secret
> > that you can't let it be shared, then don't share it.  That is your
> > decision, and no one elses.  For example, I appreciate what sannse is
> > saying, and I hold her in very high regard, but I think her opposition
> > to the policy is misguided.  People *do* already know who she is.  The
> > point is that the Foundation cannot risk letting people no Foundation
> > person has shaken hands with, spoken to on the phone, etc., from having
> > the capacity to expose confidential information.  One word: Essjay.

> Has anyone ever (and I do mean *ever*) seriously asserted that Essjay in
> any way abused oversight, CheckUser, or OTRS access? That seems to me a
> serious misrepresentation of what was essentially a PR mishap for the
> WMF. If your point is only that he was a pseudonymous user with access
> to confidential information, then your one word might as well have been
> "Dmcdevit," or dozens of people here:
> <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CheckUser#Current_users_with_access>.
> But crying "Essjay" is sensationalizing the issue, and kicking the man
> while he's down for no discernible reason.

Agreed. This is an allegation of malfeasance in use of the tools, and
needs to be substantiated or withdrawn.

- d.

More information about the foundation-l mailing list