WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
71 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

Kat Walsh-4
The Wikimedia Foundation has passed a resolution requiring all users
with access to non-public data covered by the site's Privacy Policy to
provide identification to the Foundation. This includes checkusers,
oversights, stewards, and volunteers on OTRS. In addition, all users
holding these positions must be 18 or older, and also of the age of
majority in whichever jurisdiction they live in.

To read the details of the resolution, please see:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Access_to_nonpublic_data

A number of parties have trusted us with private, sensitive, or
confidential information. Some of the handling of this information is
delegated, by necessity, to certain trusted volunteers. In
consideration of those who depend on us to behave responsibly, and the
reasonable and commonly-accepted practices for handling private
information, we wish to be able to say who is responsible for handling
this information to ensure that volunteers can be held accountable for
their own actions.

Those affected by this resolution should contact Cary Bass, WMF
volunteer coordinator, at [hidden email]. We will also attempt to
contact everyone individually who will need to do this; however,
please spread this message to those in your communities.

For the Wikimedia Foundation,
Kat Walsh

--
Wikimedia needs you: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Fundraising

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

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

George William Herbert
On 4/30/07, Kat Walsh <[hidden email]> wrote:

> The Wikimedia Foundation has passed a resolution requiring all users
> with access to non-public data covered by the site's Privacy Policy to
> provide identification to the Foundation. This includes checkusers,
> oversights, stewards, and volunteers on OTRS. In addition, all users
> holding these positions must be 18 or older, and also of the age of
> majority in whichever jurisdiction they live in.
>
> To read the details of the resolution, please see:
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Access_to_nonpublic_data
>
> A number of parties have trusted us with private, sensitive, or
> confidential information. Some of the handling of this information is
> delegated, by necessity, to certain trusted volunteers. In
> consideration of those who depend on us to behave responsibly, and the
> reasonable and commonly-accepted practices for handling private
> information, we wish to be able to say who is responsible for handling
> this information to ensure that volunteers can be held accountable for
> their own actions.
>
> Those affected by this resolution should contact Cary Bass, WMF
> volunteer coordinator, at [hidden email]. We will also attempt to
> contact everyone individually who will need to do this; however,
> please spread this message to those in your communities.
>
> For the Wikimedia Foundation,
> Kat Walsh

Clarification query: Does this apply to the unblock-en-l volunteer
staff as well?

Thank you.


--
-george william herbert
[hidden email]

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

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public datapassed

Casey Brown-2
I don't think so.  We do not have access to non-public data.  There are
messages posted everywhere that this is just a mailing list and that they
should not share any private information.

Casey Brown
Cbrown1023

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of George
Herbert
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 9:21 PM
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List; Requests from blocked users
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] WMF resolution on access to non-public
datapassed

On 4/30/07, Kat Walsh <[hidden email]> wrote:

> The Wikimedia Foundation has passed a resolution requiring all users
> with access to non-public data covered by the site's Privacy Policy to
> provide identification to the Foundation. This includes checkusers,
> oversights, stewards, and volunteers on OTRS. In addition, all users
> holding these positions must be 18 or older, and also of the age of
> majority in whichever jurisdiction they live in.
>
> To read the details of the resolution, please see:
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Access_to_nonpublic_data
>
> A number of parties have trusted us with private, sensitive, or
> confidential information. Some of the handling of this information is
> delegated, by necessity, to certain trusted volunteers. In
> consideration of those who depend on us to behave responsibly, and the
> reasonable and commonly-accepted practices for handling private
> information, we wish to be able to say who is responsible for handling
> this information to ensure that volunteers can be held accountable for
> their own actions.
>
> Those affected by this resolution should contact Cary Bass, WMF
> volunteer coordinator, at [hidden email]. We will also attempt to
> contact everyone individually who will need to do this; however,
> please spread this message to those in your communities.
>
> For the Wikimedia Foundation,
> Kat Walsh

Clarification query: Does this apply to the unblock-en-l volunteer
staff as well?

Thank you.


--
-george william herbert
[hidden email]

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


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

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public datapassed

George William Herbert
In reply to this post by George William Herbert
On 4/30/07, Casey Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I don't think so.  We do not have access to non-public data.  There are
> messages posted everywhere that this is just a mailing list and that they
> should not share any private information.
>
> Casey Brown
> Cbrown1023
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of George
> Herbert
> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 9:21 PM
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List; Requests from blocked users
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] WMF resolution on access to non-public
> datapassed
>
> On 4/30/07, Kat Walsh <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > The Wikimedia Foundation has passed a resolution requiring all users
> > with access to non-public data covered by the site's Privacy Policy to
> > provide identification to the Foundation. This includes checkusers,
> > oversights, stewards, and volunteers on OTRS. In addition, all users
> > holding these positions must be 18 or older, and also of the age of
> > majority in whichever jurisdiction they live in.
> >
> > To read the details of the resolution, please see:
> > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Access_to_nonpublic_data
> >
> > A number of parties have trusted us with private, sensitive, or
> > confidential information. Some of the handling of this information is
> > delegated, by necessity, to certain trusted volunteers. In
> > consideration of those who depend on us to behave responsibly, and the
> > reasonable and commonly-accepted practices for handling private
> > information, we wish to be able to say who is responsible for handling
> > this information to ensure that volunteers can be held accountable for
> > their own actions.
> >
> > Those affected by this resolution should contact Cary Bass, WMF
> > volunteer coordinator, at [hidden email]. We will also attempt to
> > contact everyone individually who will need to do this; however,
> > please spread this message to those in your communities.
> >
> > For the Wikimedia Foundation,
> > Kat Walsh
>
> Clarification query: Does this apply to the unblock-en-l volunteer
> staff as well?
>
> Thank you.
>
>
> --
> -george william herbert
> [hidden email]

The concern I have, and the reason that I want the foundation to
clarify, is that we do get people's real identity info in many cases,
some of them send us real name, "real" email addresses, in some cases
even home addresses, phone numbers, etc. in the process of identifying
to work on an unblock.

The Checkuser info in comparison only amounts to IP address backtracking.

We don't require real ID for most cases, but it has come by in many
many incidents.  In some cases it's sent without us even asking for
it, and in other cases (of alledged sockpuppetry) it's been negotiated
as a way to prove that you're someone else.

Our concern over this info was why we shut the unblock-en-l list down
from open to closed a month or two ago, after all.


--
-george william herbert
[hidden email]

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

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

Brianna Laugher
In reply to this post by Kat Walsh-4
On 01/05/07, Kat Walsh <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Those affected by this resolution should contact Cary Bass, WMF
> volunteer coordinator, at [hidden email]. We will also attempt to
> contact everyone individually who will need to do this; however,
> please spread this message to those in your communities.

Before Cary gets inundated, what should we be supplying? Scans of
drivers licenses and the like? Fax of birth certs to the WMF office?

cheers,
Brianna
user:pfctdayelise

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

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

KIZU Naoko
On 5/1/07, Brianna Laugher <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 01/05/07, Kat Walsh <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Those affected by this resolution should contact Cary Bass, WMF
> > volunteer coordinator, at [hidden email]. We will also attempt to
> > contact everyone individually who will need to do this; however,
> > please spread this message to those in your communities.
>
> Before Cary gets inundated, what should we be supplying? Scans of
> drivers licenses and the like? Fax of birth certs to the WMF office?

/me expects Cary announces the way to identify.

A next question. Some of us faxed a copy of passports once to the
Foundation office for another purpose. Is it sufficient for the
Office, if they are told "hey you have already gotten it" or they
would like us to send them it again?

--
KIZU Naoko
  Wikiquote: http://wikiquote.org
  * habent enim emolumentum in labore suo *

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

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

shi zhao
How to prove their identity?

2007/5/1, Aphaia <[hidden email]>:

> On 5/1/07, Brianna Laugher <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On 01/05/07, Kat Walsh <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > Those affected by this resolution should contact Cary Bass, WMF
> > > volunteer coordinator, at [hidden email]. We will also attempt to
> > > contact everyone individually who will need to do this; however,
> > > please spread this message to those in your communities.
> >
> > Before Cary gets inundated, what should we be supplying? Scans of
> > drivers licenses and the like? Fax of birth certs to the WMF office?
>
> /me expects Cary announces the way to identify.
>
> A next question. Some of us faxed a copy of passports once to the
> Foundation office for another purpose. Is it sufficient for the
> Office, if they are told "hey you have already gotten it" or they
> would like us to send them it again?
>
> --
> KIZU Naoko
>  Wikiquote: http://wikiquote.org
>  * habent enim emolumentum in labore suo *
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


--
Chinese wikipedia: http://zh.wikipedia.org/
My blog: http://talk.blogbus.com
CNBlog: http://blog.cnblog.org/weblog.html
Social Brain: http://www.socialbrain.org/default.asp
cnbloggercon: http://www.cnbloggercon.org/

[[zh:User:Shizhao]]

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

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

Mohamed Magdy-2
In reply to this post by Kat Walsh-4
<snip>
"Passed with 6 support votes and 1 abstention,"

Can we know who refused and perhaps her/his reasons? :) or that would be
off-limit?

=alnokta


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

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

Walter Vermeir-2
In reply to this post by shi zhao
shi zhao schreef:
> How to prove their identity?

Is it not so that in some country's, like the USA, that is impossible?
No identity cards, no national database of birth registration, change of
address, change of sex, marital status, dead. I believe wives even
change there name there when the marry. I do not see how you could
possibly be sure about the identity of anybody in a country like that.

--
Contact: walter AT wikizine DOT org
Wikizine.org - news for and about the Wikimedia community


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

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

oscar van dillen
In reply to this post by shi zhao
you mean, while we evidently trust them to use the tools as trusted members
of our community, we still cannot not trust them to *not* send in something
illegal such as a forged identity?

best,
oscar

On 5/1/07, shi zhao <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> How to prove their identity?
>
> 2007/5/1, Aphaia <[hidden email]>:
> > On 5/1/07, Brianna Laugher <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > On 01/05/07, Kat Walsh <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > Those affected by this resolution should contact Cary Bass, WMF
> > > > volunteer coordinator, at [hidden email]. We will also attempt
> to
> > > > contact everyone individually who will need to do this; however,
> > > > please spread this message to those in your communities.
> > >
> > > Before Cary gets inundated, what should we be supplying? Scans of
> > > drivers licenses and the like? Fax of birth certs to the WMF office?
> >
> > /me expects Cary announces the way to identify.
> >
> > A next question. Some of us faxed a copy of passports once to the
> > Foundation office for another purpose. Is it sufficient for the
> > Office, if they are told "hey you have already gotten it" or they
> > would like us to send them it again?
> >
> > --
> > KIZU Naoko
> >  Wikiquote: http://wikiquote.org
> >  * habent enim emolumentum in labore suo *
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
> --
> Chinese wikipedia: http://zh.wikipedia.org/
> My blog: http://talk.blogbus.com
> CNBlog: http://blog.cnblog.org/weblog.html
> Social Brain: http://www.socialbrain.org/default.asp
> cnbloggercon: http://www.cnbloggercon.org/
>
> [[zh:User:Shizhao]]
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



--
DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of the
Wikimedia Foundation nor of its Board of Trustees.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

Mohamed Magdy-2
In reply to this post by Walter Vermeir-2
Walter Vermeir wrote:

> shi zhao schreef:
>  
>> How to prove their identity?
>>    
>
> Is it not so that in some country's, like the USA, that is impossible?
> No identity cards, no national database of birth registration, change of
> address, change of sex, marital status, dead. I believe wives even
> change there name there when the marry. I do not see how you could
> possibly be sure about the identity of anybody in a country like that.
>
>  
can i?
...
...
...
lol :)

Seriously though, I think Shi was talking about how to make sure that
whatever information the user is sending are the truth..and that s/he
isn't forging it somehow...

=alnokta

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

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

KIZU Naoko
In reply to this post by oscar van dillen
On 5/1/07, oscar van dillen <[hidden email]> wrote:
> you mean, while we evidently trust them to use the tools as trusted members
> of our community, we still cannot not trust them to *not* send in something
> illegal such as a forged identity?

I would like to point out Ryan Jordan didn't stop to claim his fake
identification after he got some positions of trust including a global
one (boardvote access). So your argument sounds me a bit unwise. But
forging an identity which looks as if the goverment issues is not a
same thing, hopefully.

> best,
> oscar
>
> On 5/1/07, shi zhao <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > How to prove their identity?
> >
> > 2007/5/1, Aphaia <[hidden email]>:
> > > On 5/1/07, Brianna Laugher <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > On 01/05/07, Kat Walsh <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > Those affected by this resolution should contact Cary Bass, WMF
> > > > > volunteer coordinator, at [hidden email]. We will also attempt
> > to
> > > > > contact everyone individually who will need to do this; however,
> > > > > please spread this message to those in your communities.
> > > >
> > > > Before Cary gets inundated, what should we be supplying? Scans of
> > > > drivers licenses and the like? Fax of birth certs to the WMF office?
> > >
> > > /me expects Cary announces the way to identify.
> > >
> > > A next question. Some of us faxed a copy of passports once to the
> > > Foundation office for another purpose. Is it sufficient for the
> > > Office, if they are told "hey you have already gotten it" or they
> > > would like us to send them it again?
> > >
> > > --
> > > KIZU Naoko
> > >  Wikiquote: http://wikiquote.org
> > >  * habent enim emolumentum in labore suo *
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > [hidden email]
> > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Chinese wikipedia: http://zh.wikipedia.org/
> > My blog: http://talk.blogbus.com
> > CNBlog: http://blog.cnblog.org/weblog.html
> > Social Brain: http://www.socialbrain.org/default.asp
> > cnbloggercon: http://www.cnbloggercon.org/
> >
> > [[zh:User:Shizhao]]
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
>
> --
> DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of the
> Wikimedia Foundation nor of its Board of Trustees.
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


--
KIZU Naoko
  Wikiquote: http://wikiquote.org
  * habent enim emolumentum in labore suo *

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

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

David Gerard-2
In reply to this post by Mohamed Magdy-2
On 02/05/07, Mohamed Magdy <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Seriously though, I think Shi was talking about how to make sure that
> whatever information the user is sending are the truth..and that s/he
> isn't forging it somehow...


Fairly obviously, this isn't going to be forgery proof. Its power
would be as an arse-covering measure in case a volunteer with private
info turns evil or crazy. That is, the Foundation has the identity
info supplied by the volunteer, and if they lied then the volunteer is
the liar.


- d.

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

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

Gerard Meijssen-3
In reply to this post by Kat Walsh-4
Hoi,
Does this mean that developers have to identify themselves as well and have
to be so mature that they are proven legally adult ?

I hope the WMF will consider this not a position of trust in accordance with
this resolution.. If it is not, I think it I am sure that it is collateral
damage.

Thanks,
    GerardM

On 5/1/07, Kat Walsh <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> The Wikimedia Foundation has passed a resolution requiring all users
> with access to non-public data covered by the site's Privacy Policy to
> provide identification to the Foundation. This includes checkusers,
> oversights, stewards, and volunteers on OTRS. In addition, all users
> holding these positions must be 18 or older, and also of the age of
> majority in whichever jurisdiction they live in.
>
> To read the details of the resolution, please see:
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Access_to_nonpublic_data
>
> A number of parties have trusted us with private, sensitive, or
> confidential information. Some of the handling of this information is
> delegated, by necessity, to certain trusted volunteers. In
> consideration of those who depend on us to behave responsibly, and the
> reasonable and commonly-accepted practices for handling private
> information, we wish to be able to say who is responsible for handling
> this information to ensure that volunteers can be held accountable for
> their own actions.
>
> Those affected by this resolution should contact Cary Bass, WMF
> volunteer coordinator, at [hidden email]. We will also attempt to
> contact everyone individually who will need to do this; however,
> please spread this message to those in your communities.
>
> For the Wikimedia Foundation,
> Kat Walsh
>
> --
> Wikimedia needs you: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Fundraising
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

Sydney Poore
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
In the United States commonly a notary public  is used to certify the
identity of a person signing forms and supplying identification. So that
might be an option for some people. Otherwise just having them provide ID
and sign a form stating it is valid provides a measure of protection for the
organization.

Sydney aka FloNight



On 5/1/07, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 02/05/07, Mohamed Magdy <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Seriously though, I think Shi was talking about how to make sure that
> > whatever information the user is sending are the truth..and that s/he
> > isn't forging it somehow...
>
>
> Fairly obviously, this isn't going to be forgery proof. Its power
> would be as an arse-covering measure in case a volunteer with private
> info turns evil or crazy. That is, the Foundation has the identity
> info supplied by the volunteer, and if they lied then the volunteer is
> the liar.
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

Mohamed Magdy-2
In reply to this post by oscar van dillen
oscar van dillen wrote:
> you mean, while we evidently trust them to use the tools as trusted members
> of our community, we still cannot not trust them to *not* send in something
> illegal such as a forged identity?
>
>  
I'm just responding to the question as I interpreted it..no more no
less... but in my opinion..we should always assume good faith...that
those spending this *crazy* time on the projects have nice reason and
want to make it  better...and after all..what harm could anyone do that
is not revertible?

<snip>


)alnokta

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

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

Mohamed Magdy-2
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
<snip>
> and if they lied then the volunteer is
> the liar.
>
>
>  
...and thus the foundation cannot be held responsible...

Ah, so that (resolution) is for the legal issues?

$alnokta


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

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

Sydney Poore
And it helps keep honest people honest. People that are truly up to no good
will find a way to beat even the most security minded systems.

Sydney

On 5/2/07, Mohamed Magdy <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> <snip>
> > and if they lied then the volunteer is
> > the liar.
> >
> >
> >
> ...and thus the foundation cannot be held responsible...
>
> Ah, so that (resolution) is for the legal issues?
>
> $alnokta
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

Florence Devouard-3
In reply to this post by Mohamed Magdy-2
Mohamed Magdy wrote:
> <snip>
> "Passed with 6 support votes and 1 abstention,"
>
> Can we know who refused and perhaps her/his reasons? :) or that would be
> off-limit?
>
> =alnokta

Jimbo did not vote (it is not a blank vote where he refused to take a
position, it is that he did not come to vote).

You may ask him, but I can pretty much (say 99%) affirm that you should
not read anything special in the abstention (except "I was busy with
other things and did not vote in time. But I am fully in agreement with
the resolution").

It is frequent that some resolutions fail to get 100% of vote expressed.
To avoid blocking the decision making process, we even voted this
resolution over a year ago:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution_Consent_Procedures

Now, thanks for asking the question, because I just realised "abstain"
with "did not vote" were mixed under a unique description "abstain".
Which is not correct as in one case a vote is given, in the other, no
vote is given. The meaning is not the same. I will go through all the
resolutions to check and correct this.

Ant


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

Re: WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

Kelly Martin-3
On 5/1/07, Florence Devouard <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Now, thanks for asking the question, because I just realised "abstain"
> with "did not vote" were mixed under a unique description "abstain".
> Which is not correct as in one case a vote is given, in the other, no
> vote is given. The meaning is not the same. I will go through all the
> resolutions to check and correct this.

Under US parliamentary law, an "abstension" is a deliberate refusal to
vote: it means that the member is present in the chamber but actively
refused to cast a vote in the ballot.  Merely failing to vote due to
being absent or unavailable is not an abstension.  There is a
significant distinction, and your use of the incorrect term may have
confused some readers in the thread.

It would have been more appropriate to report the result as "six
members in favor, one member not voting".

Kelly

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
1234