Privacy etc - merging data

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Privacy etc - merging data

Lodewijk
I am assuming that people will be warned and asked for permission in advance
to combine these databases? I for one would definitely have strong
objections against merging donation and edit data. Donations are real life,
edits are wikipedia-universe. Although I do realize that it is much more
convenient for staff to have this data combined, I find this objectionable
from the privacy point of view. (putting this in a new thread to seperate
discussions a bit) I am not sure of legal requirements in this field in the
US - but I hope Wikipedia will always adhere to also for example European
principles in this regard whether it is maybe or maybe not legally obliged
to.

Best,

Lodewijk

2010/7/16 Philippe Beaudette <[hidden email]>

> Hiya -
>
> I asked Danese, who is currently buried under about 20 pounds of stuff
> after coming back from Wikimania, to further describe the stakeholder
> database.  Her response is:
>
> Sue has a vision for a single master database that tracks our
> interactions with movement participants.  It is intended to help us
> better respond to requests from individuals by joining all the info we
> have from prior interactions with that person.  This will be
> particularly important as we grow the staff, because current
> onboarding time requires long "buddy system" pairings with existing
> staff to teach how to best interact.  So for instance, if you have had
> a Wikipedia account since 2005, have made enough edits to become, say,
> an Admin, have uploaded 100 images to Commons, have been a donor every
> year and have responded helpfully to many OTRS requests, there should
> be a quick way for a new staffer to learn those facts.  All of this
> information is available to the staff now, just not in an aggregated
> place.
>
> Danese
>
>
>
> On Jul 15, 2010, at 12:41 PM, Excirial wrote:
>
> > I have gone trough the report, and immediately noted the extremely
> > strong
> > growth of the foundation in terms of personal (Nearly doubling the
> > amount
> > two years in a row). Generally i am not a fan of such fast growth as
> > it
> > often leads to bloating; but seeing the the rest of the plan looks
> > fine i
> > presume i am just viewing things to black and white.
> >
> > One particular detail in the "Top Spending Increases, continued"
> > section
> > raised some question marks for me though. There is a 2.6 million
> > dollar
> > increase in the "Other tech staffing and stakeholder database"
> > category. I
> > can understand the 10 new tech position and the annualization of
> > existing
> > tech salaries paid by this increase, but what role will the
> > stakeholder
> > database have? The description, "development of a database to track
> > relationships with all stakeholders including readers, editors,
> > donors,
> > other volunteers, etc." is rather vague and includes no real
> > indication as
> > to its purpose. What exactly will it track, and what will the
> > information be
> > used for? Since there are so many editors on-wiki i doubt that this
> > will be
> > used as a full-fledged CRM (customer relationship management) system
> > used to
> > track literally everything. All i can imagine is that it could track
> > top
> > level community issues such as flagged revisions or OTRS complains.
> >
> > Anyone who has some more information on this system? I'm quite
> > interested to
> > be honest.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > ~Excirial
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Oliver Keyes
> > <[hidden email]>wrote:
> >
> >> Now if we only had some kind of mobile device which could be given
> >> to such
> >> institutions containing a copy! :P.
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <
> >> [hidden email]
> >>> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Samuel Klein wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Every national and regional library should have a local copy of
> >>> Wikimedia.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> With a full history dump?
> >>>
> >>> ;-)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Yours,
> >>>
> >>> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> foundation-l mailing list
> >>> [hidden email]
> >>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> foundation-l mailing list
> >> [hidden email]
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/
> >> foundation-l
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Privacy etc - merging data

Gerard Meijssen-3
Hoi,
As far as I know the data involved is exempt from having to be registered
with the registrar in the Netherlands. This is the type of data that is
essential for the running of an organisation like ours. You may feel
uncomfortable about this but that is tough. What is important is the way the
data separate or combined is treated. To appreciate what you can expect
there is a privacy policy.. recommended reading..

In my appreciation, the fact that the WMF has never received a monetary
donation from me means that I am unlikely to be approached as a donor. If
the WMF thinks any less of me, it is their problem not mine.
Thanks,
        GerardM

On 16 July 2010 14:00, Lodewijk <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am assuming that people will be warned and asked for permission in
> advance
> to combine these databases? I for one would definitely have strong
> objections against merging donation and edit data. Donations are real life,
> edits are wikipedia-universe. Although I do realize that it is much more
> convenient for staff to have this data combined, I find this objectionable
> from the privacy point of view. (putting this in a new thread to seperate
> discussions a bit) I am not sure of legal requirements in this field in the
> US - but I hope Wikipedia will always adhere to also for example European
> principles in this regard whether it is maybe or maybe not legally obliged
> to.
>
> Best,
>
> Lodewijk
>
> 2010/7/16 Philippe Beaudette <[hidden email]>
>
> > Hiya -
> >
> > I asked Danese, who is currently buried under about 20 pounds of stuff
> > after coming back from Wikimania, to further describe the stakeholder
> > database.  Her response is:
> >
> > Sue has a vision for a single master database that tracks our
> > interactions with movement participants.  It is intended to help us
> > better respond to requests from individuals by joining all the info we
> > have from prior interactions with that person.  This will be
> > particularly important as we grow the staff, because current
> > onboarding time requires long "buddy system" pairings with existing
> > staff to teach how to best interact.  So for instance, if you have had
> > a Wikipedia account since 2005, have made enough edits to become, say,
> > an Admin, have uploaded 100 images to Commons, have been a donor every
> > year and have responded helpfully to many OTRS requests, there should
> > be a quick way for a new staffer to learn those facts.  All of this
> > information is available to the staff now, just not in an aggregated
> > place.
> >
> > Danese
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jul 15, 2010, at 12:41 PM, Excirial wrote:
> >
> > > I have gone trough the report, and immediately noted the extremely
> > > strong
> > > growth of the foundation in terms of personal (Nearly doubling the
> > > amount
> > > two years in a row). Generally i am not a fan of such fast growth as
> > > it
> > > often leads to bloating; but seeing the the rest of the plan looks
> > > fine i
> > > presume i am just viewing things to black and white.
> > >
> > > One particular detail in the "Top Spending Increases, continued"
> > > section
> > > raised some question marks for me though. There is a 2.6 million
> > > dollar
> > > increase in the "Other tech staffing and stakeholder database"
> > > category. I
> > > can understand the 10 new tech position and the annualization of
> > > existing
> > > tech salaries paid by this increase, but what role will the
> > > stakeholder
> > > database have? The description, "development of a database to track
> > > relationships with all stakeholders including readers, editors,
> > > donors,
> > > other volunteers, etc." is rather vague and includes no real
> > > indication as
> > > to its purpose. What exactly will it track, and what will the
> > > information be
> > > used for? Since there are so many editors on-wiki i doubt that this
> > > will be
> > > used as a full-fledged CRM (customer relationship management) system
> > > used to
> > > track literally everything. All i can imagine is that it could track
> > > top
> > > level community issues such as flagged revisions or OTRS complains.
> > >
> > > Anyone who has some more information on this system? I'm quite
> > > interested to
> > > be honest.
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > > ~Excirial
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Oliver Keyes
> > > <[hidden email]>wrote:
> > >
> > >> Now if we only had some kind of mobile device which could be given
> > >> to such
> > >> institutions containing a copy! :P.
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <
> > >> [hidden email]
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Samuel Klein wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Every national and regional library should have a local copy of
> > >>> Wikimedia.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> With a full history dump?
> > >>>
> > >>> ;-)
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Yours,
> > >>>
> > >>> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> foundation-l mailing list
> > >>> [hidden email]
> > >>> Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >>>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> foundation-l mailing list
> > >> [hidden email]
> > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/
> > >> foundation-l
> > >>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Privacy etc - merging data

geni
On 16 July 2010 13:14, Gerard Meijssen <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hoi,
> As far as I know the data involved is exempt from having to be registered
> with the registrar in the Netherlands. This is the type of data that is
> essential for the running of an organisation like ours. You may feel
> uncomfortable about this but that is tough.

I'd suggest letting the WMF answer questions like that.

--
geni

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Privacy etc - merging data

K. Peachey
In reply to this post by Lodewijk
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Lodewijk <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I am assuming that people will be warned and asked for permission in advance
> to combine these databases? I for one would definitely have strong
> objections against merging donation and edit data. Donations are real life,
> edits are wikipedia-universe. Although I do realize that it is much more
> convenient for staff to have this data combined, I find this objectionable
> from the privacy point of view. (putting this in a new thread to seperate
> discussions a bit) I am not sure of legal requirements in this field in the
> US - but I hope Wikipedia will always adhere to also for example European
> principles in this regard whether it is maybe or maybe not legally obliged
> to.
>
> Best,
>
> Lodewijk
What I believe this is referring to, is that the Customer Relation
Manager (CRM) [CiviCRM iirc] to be setup to allow for some details
about the people to be stored such as their usernames/interests/etc
compared to it just being a word of mouth system where staff members
need to track down which staff know who.

So for example a staff member can look up a person and go "oh Jimmy
Bloggs is interested in political photograph, X might interest him"
compared to say "Jimmy Bloggs was entered by Sally Doors, I need to go
talk to her," who redirects to someone else that knows more about the
subject.

-Peachey

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Privacy etc - merging data

Oliver Keyes-3
So the logic seems to be thus - if I tell employee X something about my
life, interests, experience, C.V. that could possibly be of use or interest
to the Foundation, it's fine to store it on a central database where all and
sundry within the Foundation can get at it, despite the fact that this was
never my intent.

On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 2:01 AM, K. Peachey <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Lodewijk <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > I am assuming that people will be warned and asked for permission in
> advance
> > to combine these databases? I for one would definitely have strong
> > objections against merging donation and edit data. Donations are real
> life,
> > edits are wikipedia-universe. Although I do realize that it is much more
> > convenient for staff to have this data combined, I find this
> objectionable
> > from the privacy point of view. (putting this in a new thread to seperate
> > discussions a bit) I am not sure of legal requirements in this field in
> the
> > US - but I hope Wikipedia will always adhere to also for example European
> > principles in this regard whether it is maybe or maybe not legally
> obliged
> > to.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Lodewijk
> What I believe this is referring to, is that the Customer Relation
> Manager (CRM) [CiviCRM iirc] to be setup to allow for some details
> about the people to be stored such as their usernames/interests/etc
> compared to it just being a word of mouth system where staff members
> need to track down which staff know who.
>
> So for example a staff member can look up a person and go "oh Jimmy
> Bloggs is interested in political photograph, X might interest him"
> compared to say "Jimmy Bloggs was entered by Sally Doors, I need to go
> talk to her," who redirects to someone else that knows more about the
> subject.
>
> -Peachey
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Privacy etc - merging data

Excirial
*So the logic seems to be thus - if I tell employee X something about my
life, interests, experience, C.V. that could possibly be of use or interest
to the Foundation, it's fine to store it on a central database where all and
sundry within the Foundation can get at it, despite the fact that this was
never my intent.*

I don't think the system is intended to work this way. The system seems to
be akin to a CRM system, and i presume only relevant information will be
tracked. For example, you might contact the foundation wishing to set up
another local chapter, asking for an internship or merely to request
information on policies, this previous request is logged. If you call again
it is likely you will get someone else on the phone, which means you would
have to explain the whole situation again. In the current situation the
"buddy system" seems to take care of this, as people are likely to share
such information over coffee so everyone knows what person XyZ called for.
Due to the predicted explosive growth such a buddy system would overextend
itself, thus necessitating some form of central storage.

Keep in mind that "Stakeholders" is a very wide term. Wikipedians are but
one group - The foundation will also receive calls from companies asking why
their page was removed, From universities to ask if they can integrate
Wikipedia editing in their curriculum, from other institutions that give
Wikipedia grants for development, from journalists, politicians... The
possibilities are endless, as a stakeholder is merely someone interested in
the foundation.

~Excirial

On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 2:36 PM, Oliver Keyes <[hidden email]>wrote:

> So the logic seems to be thus - if I tell employee X something about my
> life, interests, experience, C.V. that could possibly be of use or interest
> to the Foundation, it's fine to store it on a central database where all
> and
> sundry within the Foundation can get at it, despite the fact that this was
> never my intent.
>
> On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 2:01 AM, K. Peachey <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Lodewijk <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I am assuming that people will be warned and asked for permission in
> > advance
> > > to combine these databases? I for one would definitely have strong
> > > objections against merging donation and edit data. Donations are real
> > life,
> > > edits are wikipedia-universe. Although I do realize that it is much
> more
> > > convenient for staff to have this data combined, I find this
> > objectionable
> > > from the privacy point of view. (putting this in a new thread to
> seperate
> > > discussions a bit) I am not sure of legal requirements in this field in
> > the
> > > US - but I hope Wikipedia will always adhere to also for example
> European
> > > principles in this regard whether it is maybe or maybe not legally
> > obliged
> > > to.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Lodewijk
> > What I believe this is referring to, is that the Customer Relation
> > Manager (CRM) [CiviCRM iirc] to be setup to allow for some details
> > about the people to be stored such as their usernames/interests/etc
> > compared to it just being a word of mouth system where staff members
> > need to track down which staff know who.
> >
> > So for example a staff member can look up a person and go "oh Jimmy
> > Bloggs is interested in political photograph, X might interest him"
> > compared to say "Jimmy Bloggs was entered by Sally Doors, I need to go
> > talk to her," who redirects to someone else that knows more about the
> > subject.
> >
> > -Peachey
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Privacy etc - merging data

Lodewijk
In reply to this post by Oliver Keyes-3
I'd rather not speculate about what happens or the intent before someone
from the WMF who is responsible for this clarifies the statement. I hope we
all can hold ourselves from guessing and seeking logic until that moment.

Lodewijk

2010/7/17 Oliver Keyes <[hidden email]>

> So the logic seems to be thus - if I tell employee X something about my
> life, interests, experience, C.V. that could possibly be of use or interest
> to the Foundation, it's fine to store it on a central database where all
> and
> sundry within the Foundation can get at it, despite the fact that this was
> never my intent.
>
> On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 2:01 AM, K. Peachey <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Lodewijk <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I am assuming that people will be warned and asked for permission in
> > advance
> > > to combine these databases? I for one would definitely have strong
> > > objections against merging donation and edit data. Donations are real
> > life,
> > > edits are wikipedia-universe. Although I do realize that it is much
> more
> > > convenient for staff to have this data combined, I find this
> > objectionable
> > > from the privacy point of view. (putting this in a new thread to
> seperate
> > > discussions a bit) I am not sure of legal requirements in this field in
> > the
> > > US - but I hope Wikipedia will always adhere to also for example
> European
> > > principles in this regard whether it is maybe or maybe not legally
> > obliged
> > > to.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Lodewijk
> > What I believe this is referring to, is that the Customer Relation
> > Manager (CRM) [CiviCRM iirc] to be setup to allow for some details
> > about the people to be stored such as their usernames/interests/etc
> > compared to it just being a word of mouth system where staff members
> > need to track down which staff know who.
> >
> > So for example a staff member can look up a person and go "oh Jimmy
> > Bloggs is interested in political photograph, X might interest him"
> > compared to say "Jimmy Bloggs was entered by Sally Doors, I need to go
> > talk to her," who redirects to someone else that knows more about the
> > subject.
> >
> > -Peachey
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Privacy etc - merging data

Thomas Dalton
On 17 July 2010 13:53, Lodewijk <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I'd rather not speculate about what happens or the intent before someone
> from the WMF who is responsible for this clarifies the statement. I hope we
> all can hold ourselves from guessing and seeking logic until that moment.

This is foundation-l... your hope is misplaced!

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Privacy etc - merging data

Sue Gardner
In reply to this post by Lodewijk
Sorry -- is there a question outstanding?  I know Nathan posted some questions about the annual plan (which I think Veronique'll answer, and if she she doesn't I will).  If there was something else, I think it slipped right past me.

Thanks,
Sue

------Original Message------
From: Thomas Dalton
Sender: [hidden email]
To: [hidden email]
ReplyTo: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Privacy etc - merging data
Sent: 17 Jul 2010 07:05

On 17 July 2010 13:53, Lodewijk <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I'd rather not speculate about what happens or the intent before someone
> from the WMF who is responsible for this clarifies the statement. I hope we
> all can hold ourselves from guessing and seeking logic until that moment.

This is foundation-l... your hope is misplaced!

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Privacy etc - merging data

Thomas Dalton
On 17 July 2010 18:29, Sue Gardner <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Sorry -- is there a question outstanding?  I know Nathan posted some questions about the annual plan (which I think Veronique'll answer, and if she she doesn't I will).  If there was something else, I think it slipped right past me.

Lodewijk requested some clarification about the new stakeholder
database. In particular, whether consent would be sought before
storing information that was divulged without an intention for it to
be put in a database. Also, whether the Foundation would voluntarily
follow European standards for determining whether it is appropriate to
store certain information and how to protect it rather than just
following the much weaker US laws that it is legally obliged to
follow.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Privacy etc - merging data

Oliver Keyes-3
An additional question; is there going to be an explicit need to gain
permission, or is it simply going to be the implicit assumption that the
person does/does not want their information stored?

On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 9:13 PM, Thomas Dalton <[hidden email]>wrote:

> On 17 July 2010 18:29, Sue Gardner <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Sorry -- is there a question outstanding?  I know Nathan posted some
> questions about the annual plan (which I think Veronique'll answer, and if
> she she doesn't I will).  If there was something else, I think it slipped
> right past me.
>
> Lodewijk requested some clarification about the new stakeholder
> database. In particular, whether consent would be sought before
> storing information that was divulged without an intention for it to
> be put in a database. Also, whether the Foundation would voluntarily
> follow European standards for determining whether it is appropriate to
> store certain information and how to protect it rather than just
> following the much weaker US laws that it is legally obliged to
> follow.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Privacy etc - merging data

Lodewijk
In reply to this post by Sue Gardner
I was mainly wondering what the stakeholder database would look like - what
information will be in there, how is it gathered, will information from
existing databases be merged? (for example, if I am an editor and I happen
to make a donation - will that information be put into one combined database
if you happen to know the real name behind me?)

I can hardly imagine that the Wikimedia Foundation woul go wild privacy
wise, but I am just asking to make sure we have a similar understanding.

I am sorry if I did not put my question clear enough.

best, Lodewijk

2010/7/17 Sue Gardner <[hidden email]>

> Sorry -- is there a question outstanding?  I know Nathan posted some
> questions about the annual plan (which I think Veronique'll answer, and if
> she she doesn't I will).  If there was something else, I think it slipped
> right past me.
>
> Thanks,
> Sue
>
> ------Original Message------
> From: Thomas Dalton
> Sender: [hidden email]
> To: [hidden email]
> ReplyTo: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Privacy etc - merging data
> Sent: 17 Jul 2010 07:05
>
> On 17 July 2010 13:53, Lodewijk <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I'd rather not speculate about what happens or the intent before someone
> > from the WMF who is responsible for this clarifies the statement. I hope
> we
> > all can hold ourselves from guessing and seeking logic until that moment.
>
> This is foundation-l... your hope is misplaced!
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l