[Foundation-l] Privacy etc - merging data

Fri Jul 16 12:14:15 UTC 2010

Hoi,
As far as I know the data involved is exempt from having to be registered
with the registrar in the Netherlands. This is the type of data that is
essential for the running of an organisation like ours. You may feel
uncomfortable about this but that is tough. What is important is the way the
data separate or combined is treated. To appreciate what you can expect
there is a privacy policy.. recommended reading..

In my appreciation, the fact that the WMF has never received a monetary
donation from me means that I am unlikely to be approached as a donor. If
the WMF thinks any less of me, it is their problem not mine.
Thanks,
        GerardM

On 16 July 2010 14:00, Lodewijk <lodewijk at effeietsanders.org> wrote:

> I am assuming that people will be warned and asked for permission in
> advance
> to combine these databases? I for one would definitely have strong
> objections against merging donation and edit data. Donations are real life,
> edits are wikipedia-universe. Although I do realize that it is much more
> convenient for staff to have this data combined, I find this objectionable
> from the privacy point of view. (putting this in a new thread to seperate
> discussions a bit) I am not sure of legal requirements in this field in the
> US - but I hope Wikipedia will always adhere to also for example European
> principles in this regard whether it is maybe or maybe not legally obliged
> to.
>
> Best,
>
> Lodewijk
>
> 2010/7/16 Philippe Beaudette <pbeaudette at wikimedia.org>
>
> > Hiya -
> >
> > I asked Danese, who is currently buried under about 20 pounds of stuff
> > after coming back from Wikimania, to further describe the stakeholder
> > database.  Her response is:
> >
> > Sue has a vision for a single master database that tracks our
> > interactions with movement participants.  It is intended to help us
> > better respond to requests from individuals by joining all the info we
> > have from prior interactions with that person.  This will be
> > particularly important as we grow the staff, because current
> > onboarding time requires long "buddy system" pairings with existing
> > staff to teach how to best interact.  So for instance, if you have had
> > a Wikipedia account since 2005, have made enough edits to become, say,
> > an Admin, have uploaded 100 images to Commons, have been a donor every
> > year and have responded helpfully to many OTRS requests, there should
> > be a quick way for a new staffer to learn those facts.  All of this
> > information is available to the staff now, just not in an aggregated
> > place.
> >
> > Danese
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jul 15, 2010, at 12:41 PM, Excirial wrote:
> >
> > > I have gone trough the report, and immediately noted the extremely
> > > strong
> > > growth of the foundation in terms of personal (Nearly doubling the
> > > amount
> > > two years in a row). Generally i am not a fan of such fast growth as
> > > it
> > > often leads to bloating; but seeing the the rest of the plan looks
> > > fine i
> > > presume i am just viewing things to black and white.
> > >
> > > One particular detail in the "Top Spending Increases, continued"
> > > section
> > > raised some question marks for me though. There is a 2.6 million
> > > dollar
> > > increase in the "Other tech staffing and stakeholder database"
> > > category. I
> > > can understand the 10 new tech position and the annualization of
> > > existing
> > > tech salaries paid by this increase, but what role will the
> > > stakeholder
> > > database have? The description, "development of a database to track
> > > relationships with all stakeholders including readers, editors,
> > > donors,
> > > other volunteers, etc." is rather vague and includes no real
> > > indication as
> > > to its purpose. What exactly will it track, and what will the
> > > information be
> > > used for? Since there are so many editors on-wiki i doubt that this
> > > will be
> > > used as a full-fledged CRM (customer relationship management) system
> > > used to
> > > track literally everything. All i can imagine is that it could track
> > > top
> > > level community issues such as flagged revisions or OTRS complains.
> > >
> > > Anyone who has some more information on this system? I'm quite
> > > interested to
> > > be honest.
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > > ~Excirial
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Oliver Keyes
> > > <scire.facias at gmail.com>wrote:
> > >
> > >> Now if we only had some kind of mobile device which could be given
> > >> to such
> > >> institutions containing a copy! :P.
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <
> > >> cimonavaro at gmail.com
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Samuel Klein wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Every national and regional library should have a local copy of
> > >>> Wikimedia.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> With a full history dump?
> > >>>
> > >>> ;-)
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Yours,
> > >>>
> > >>> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> foundation-l mailing list
> > >>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > >>> Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >>>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> foundation-l mailing list
> > >> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/
> > >> foundation-l
> > >>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>