On Nov 29, 2007 4:33 PM, jayjg jayjg99@gmail.com wrote:
On Nov 29, 2007 4:04 PM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
Wikipedia business is the business of Wikipedia. In the context of "an administrator discussing Wikipedia business", it'd be a discussion of who to block, or what pages to protect, or something like that. "Anything about Wikipedia" would include that and anything else related to Wikipedia. If I email my friend and say "Wikipedia is the greatest site ever", that'd be "about Wikipedia", but it wouldn't be "Wikipedia business".
What about if an admin e-mailed another Wikipedian and said "Account X is new but looks suspiciously familiar with Wikipedia process"; would the Wikipedia community have a *right* to see that e-mail?
Are you asking me? My opinion is no, the community as a whole does not have a *right* to see that e-mail, but it should be logged and available to the foundation and/or an agent of the foundation. I feel that the accused Wikipedian, on the other hand, does have a *right* to see that e-mail, at least at the point that it is decided that there is enough evidence to make an action or that it was a mistake in the first place.
Of course, getting back to the discussion at hand, I would consider that to be "discussing Wikipedia business", and not just "about Wikipedia".
How about if a Wikipedia admin e-mailed another Wikipedian and said "Look at page X, it looks like some POV-warriors have really gone to work on it". That's also public property?
In my opinion, it should be.
Mind you, your own post facto re-interpretation of Alec's demands are kind of moot, considering he was insisting he needed to see the "full content of the emails" sent to both lists. That, in fact, was the context in which he insisted that every single e-mail was "Wikipedia business".
Well, I'd disagree with him on that if that's what he said, but I still don't think he ever claimed that he had a right to see everything that any admin had ever written "about Wikipedia".