I can not speak to current practice at the WMF, but I can speak to practice
when I was there (ancient history, long ago, I know) when I say that this
is something that was carefully considered and there were appropriate
experts consulted at the time. Knowing the team there like i do, I'm
confident that those plans have not lapsed, and that they continue to give
appropriate (though not paranoiac) consideration to the realities of the
world.
I also know that when I was there, we would have considered it
inappropriate to share detail about those plans publicly, and I continue to
believe that is good practice.
Philippe
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 5:19 PM, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
Safety of attendees has for a long time been a
criteria ... agree, but the
risk assesement we are discussing here is not about safety, but security. I
am sure we might not use them all properly, I am also not a native English
speaker, but they are not the same concept, right?
Now, there were examples where looking at a dossier where the information
was about only the first one... that's the point here. I am talking about
events, the first email was about the place of the office... but the
motivation of a criminal act in both case can be overlapping, so they are
an unicum in a proper evaluation, IMHO. I am not expert in the field, but
if you start to assess the risk of someone harming you in SFO, that could
happen also in another place where many of the same people gather annually,
and that you also inform millions of people with sitenotices about it.
Now, I don't say that you must inform a lot. But if you are not the police
you are also not the fire brigade, but you wouldn't write in a candidature
nothing or simply "if there is a fire someone is paid to extinguish it"...
you would make more effort, and we do. If you don't want to add another
paragraph in the final document, rename it "safety and security" but start
to think organically about it.
Alex
Il Venerdì 6 Aprile 2018 1:59, Gnangarra <gnangarra(a)gmail.com> ha
scritto:
Safety of attendees has for a long time been a criteria that needs to be
addressed when bidding for any WMF event, the people bidding are the better
placed to assess the reality of the local situation. Open bidding
processes enable others to also critically look at the options, ultimately
we are more at risk at home where feel comfortable then when travelling.
Every location has its risks, its undesirables, and crime, just getting a
taxi to and from the airport is a risk reality is its also more likely than
a terrorist event
On 6 April 2018 at 03:24, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
That's why people offwiki say they don't discuss this thing on meta or
here, because you always have an "answer" like this... this sarcasm. in
it's way, an example of an unhealthy community.
Look at what I wrote:
"Even if it is not nice to think about it, and of course you try to do it
mostly in private, you should clearly write down at least at a certain
point that you are preparing to all scenario, contacting the police and so
on. it should be a paragraph in a candidature for an event, IMHO. but it
should be done."
that's it. it's not complicated... I know because of partially direct
experience... it's part of the world, when you are professional. You can't
prepare an event of certain scale and in a certain areas and ignore it in
the final dossier. There will be someone who take a look at that. So, who
talked about "solving terrorism"? just the one who wanted to make a joke.
Maybe people are not big babies and even without constant reminder they
don't exaggerate. You have no idea with whom I discuss this aspect so far,
what such wikimedians do in their real life. They are able to focus on the
point... the point is security and if you replied this way to this question
in many situations, you will be considered unprepared.
Alex
Il Giovedì 5 Aprile 2018 20:29, Alphos OGame <alphos.ogame(a)gmail.com>
ha scritto:
I heartily agree : build that firewall, and let Cisco pay for it !
Wait, what were you suggesting in your incipit ? Oh, right, "a way that's
rational, avoiding to create unnecessary panic of course".
I'd rather not ask of people organizing conventions (which is already
time-consuming by itself) that they solve terrorism in their town, which is
what the police are probably more suited for, if you don't mind ; as a
matter of fact, it is not one of their duties as convention holders, plain
and simple, and neither are they doctors, police officers, judges, jesters,
masseuses, nannies, yoga instructors, cooks, indentured servants, etc
(except of course if they are, which may happen).
So let's please not overreact, and stick to the current discussion instead
of having the next WikiConvention in a flying fortress with armed guards,
sniffing dogs, and metal detectors at every door…
Roger / Alphos
2018-04-05 18:40 GMT+02:00 Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
<wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimediadia. org>:
I remember we discussed 2 or 3 years about this scenario with some
wikimedians off wiki. I strongly support to discuss at least once openly
about that. In a way that it's rational, avoiding to create unnecessary
panic... of course.
Despite the claimed neutrality of the communities, reality always bites.
Now, a terrorist can imagine that we will not put a black banner if someone
kill a lot of people somewhere... but if same amount of wikimedians are
killed at a international rally the probability that a block ribbon, an
editnotice with a statement appear on many language edition is higher. it's
an attack at the community like it is a proposal of a law somewhere, and we
naturally react stronger.
It would be a bigger impact, if you think about it. You can get the
attention of billions of people every time they connect to the 5th or 6th
largest website in the world. Cynically speaking, if you also consider the
facts that it's about free knowledge and volunteers, than a mass murder at
at a wikimedian event might be more "effective" than at a discotheque or
the seat of a multinational conglomerate.
If i remember correctly. in the months before a certain wiki-event, many
people linked to radical activities were arrested in the area, in the same
country. So, when you organize an event, it's not just about safety but
also security. Even if it is not nice to think about it, and of course you
try to do it mostly in private, you should clearly write down at least at a
certain point that you are preparing to all scenario, contacting the police
and so on. it should be a paragraph in a candidature for an event, IMHO.
but it should be done.
A.M.
Il Giovedì 5 Aprile 2018 18:09, Vi to <vituzzu.wiki(a)gmail.com> ha
scritto:
I read/receive related craps
<https://en.wikipedia.org/w/ index.php?title=User_talk:
Vituzzu&diff=prev&oldid= 831949995>
on
a daily basis but it's hard to tell an idiot from a psychopath, so it may
become a risk for WMF offices.
Vito
2018-04-05 17:33 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett <andy(a)pigsonthewing.org.uk>uk>:
I'm sure most of you will be aware of the
unfortunate events at
YouTube's HQ a couple fo days ago:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ YouTube_headquarters_shooting
Without giving away anything that might reveal vulnerabilities, does
the WMF have contingency plans for such an incident? What about at
community events in the US, and elsewhere?
--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
______________________________ _________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia. org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/ mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@ lists.wikimedia.org?subject= unsubscribe>
______________________________ _________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia. org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/ mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@ lists.wikimedia.org?subject= unsubscribe>
______________________________ _________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia. org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/ mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@ lists.wikimedia.org?subject= unsubscribe>
______________________________ _________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia. org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/ mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@ lists.wikimedia.org?subject= unsubscribe>
--
GN.
Noongarpedia:
https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page
WMAU:
http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery:
http://gnangarra.redbubble.comOut now: A.Gaynor, P. Newman
and P. Jennings (eds.), Never Again: Reflections on Environmental
Responsibility after Roe 8, UWAP, 2017. Order here.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>