On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 23:58, Birgitte SB <[email protected]> wrote: > ________________________________ > From: Lodewijk <[email protected]> > To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <[email protected]> > Cc: Birgitte SB <[email protected]> > Sent: Fri, February 25, 2011 3:51:50 PM > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Genisis of WMF Identification policy? > > It should be clear and transparant why the WMF is collecting this > information, and what they intend to do with it. If they want to be able to > sue people - fine, but then just say that. Then people know what they are up > against, and what the reasoning is. That way alone volunteers can make their > rational decision. But also chapters, because it might have quite some legal > complications if the WMF wants to force a chapter to submit private data > about one of their members because they want to sue this person. > > > The problem with is that none of us can imagine all the future possibilities > that could occur. The WMF can't know what they could be up against. So how > can they possibly tell you what they can't know? > > You seem to suggest the WMF suing someone is an extreme thing. But what is > really extreme is asking WMF to vow *not* to sue anyone. Lets say they do this > and imagine if a checkuser User:Foobar publishes private information on their > blog obtained as a checkuser. Someone whose privacy was violated identifies > who > User:Foobar was through their blog; sues them and wins. User:Foobar sues WMF > claiming something frivolous about not protecting them from the situation and > loses. Because of the vow WMF cannot counter-sue User:Foobar for lawyer fees > and > court costs even though WMF does not even need to the recorded identification > provided through the policy in this case because User:Foobar identified > themself > in the lawsuit they filed against WMF. > > Also the privacy policy is a joke without the identification policy. Say > checkuser User:Foo breaches the privacy policy and rightly loses checkuser > rights. There is no record available to WMF identifying RealName as > User:Foo. > So RealName retires User:Foo and registers User:Bar who is then able to > become a > checkuser. Is this truly a responsible privacy policy when there is no way of > preventing those who have abused their access to private data from once again > obtaining access to private data? > > As I said in my first email. There are valid concerns about the > identification > policy that must be resolved. However, deciding to indefinitely give > unidentifiable people access to private data can not be an option. It just > too > irresponsible. This is *my* private data you are all playing with. I won't > get > to have *your* private data in return, but you can at least give it the WMF to > act as a responsible party protecting *my* interests. I understand that you > need > some safeguards about security at WMF Office or WMF Chapters. However if you > won't be comfortable with any possible procedure where they could keep *your* > private data, then stay away from *my* private data. >
how many people do have access to private data? rupert. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
