On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 1:26 AM, Pete Forsyth <peteforsyth(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Ziko van Dijk
<zvandijk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
It's normal, when you hire a company for a
survey, you mention the
company, for various reasons.
Ziko,
This is true, of course; but it does not address what is under discussion
here.
It is also normal for partnership agreements to include specifications of
how those mentions are carried out to meet certain objectives, while also
avoiding problems for both parties. With nearly every one of my clients,
this is specified by either an informal or a formal contract, prior to the
announcement or commencement of the project.
Regrettably, it is also rather normal for the Wikimedia Foundation to pay
insufficient attention to such arrangements. This leaves volunteers in the
position of cleaning up the mess, and sometimes, of playing the role of the
"bad guy" whose image suffers from telling somebody that they can't have
what they want.
since when wikipedia needs to use some arbitrary 3rd party company to
conduct a simple survey? i'd consider it a core competency of a social
website like wikipedia to allow finding out the opinion and a
consensus of contributors and readers, anonymous and not anonymous.
rupert