z at mzmcbride.com
Tue Jun 11 02:06:57 UTC 2013
>One thing I'd also appreciate is that if indeed Wikipedia access logs are
>not even collected in the first place (except for 1/1000 samples), that
>this be stated officially, rather than relying on a two-year-old comment
>by a single, now-former employee.
Minor point: I can't tell for sure if this is a reference to Domas, but if
so, he "only" ever served as a Wikimedia Foundation Board member and
volunteer sysadmin, never as an employee, as far as I know.
>Anyone who truly needs to keep their Wikipedia use confidential should, of
>course, still take measures to anonymize their access. But for the rest
>of the time, an assurance that these logs are simply not being kept is
>suggested this in the past, and WMF has declined on the grounds that they
>want to leave flexibility should they decide to do full logging in the
I'm not sure that an empty reassurance will be particularly reassuring.
It's not as though the Legal and Community Advocacy team sets log
rotation/expiration times. This would have to be put into the privacy
policy to mean anything of substance, I think.
And I completely agree with your understanding of the current situation
(the Wikimedia Foundation objecting due to concerns about future
Though I'm now remembering that there are certain staff policies that now
exist (they contrast with official/Board policies). Perhaps that would be
an avenue to pursue?
More information about the Wikimedia-l