On Nov 29, 2007 4:33 PM, jayjg <jayjg99(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 29, 2007 4:04 PM, Anthony
<wikimail(a)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".