Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Christophe Henner]

Hi everyone,

Options to mitigate any risks are numerous, especially when it comes to
content distribution (private/semi-private/public/delegated/federated/a mix
of everything) but given the current context I would restrain from having
this as a public / community discussion.

We, community members, would most probably have great inputs but when one
is dealing with this kind of topic, designing contingencies plan, one has
to be ful of what information can be public. I have no idea whether staff
is working on such a topic, and it is better that way.

But we, as community members and awesome human beings, must be mindful of
some things:

   - The people in charge of that topic are mostly US Citizens. The current
   political and social climate is most probably draining their energy.
   Imagine having to manage it both from a personal and professional
   standpoint. Top that doing it for something as important as our projects.
   We cannot fathom their anxiety levels and should not add any to it.
   - Sending email about this topic, they have to read it. They most
   probably have to discuss, debate and balance whether they should answer or
   not. Imagine adding that to the first point.
   - They know for a fact, remember a lot of community members are staff,
   that community could be helping. But they can't ask for it.
   - Top all of that with them knowing that whatever course of action they
   might pick, it comes with a toll. Whether it is to talk about it here, and
   perhaps hinder their efforts, or not talk about it here and be perceived as
   ignoring the community.
   - Top all of that with the stress of trying to do their job in a global
   pandemic situation that might have them with loved ones at risk. Or with
   the need to care daily for young / elderly people.
   - Top that with the fact that they most probably all have relatives that
   at best are in financial struggle, or health struggles or are managing with
   the loss of loved ones.

Take a pause. Try to step in that space. Imagine how you would feel.
Multiply that by a hundred.

I would recommend we (community members) restrain from talking about it.
Perhaps what could be helpful, I am saying could, is for the people that do
actually have knowledge on those topics to just say they are available to
help if needs be with your area of expertise.

If no one at the Foundation acknowledges this thread or your emails, it is
ok. It doesn't mean you are not valued, it means that you are being spared
from that weight. We can provide support, but we should be mindful not to
increase their current level of stress.

Please all take care of yourselves, loved ones and each other

PS: I said staff, but read it as "anyone with an official Wikimedia
Foundation capacity". I know for a fact how those situations can be hard to
manage when you are a volunteer board member in the shadow too.


--
Christophe


On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 21:32, Steven Walling 
wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 12:22 PM Nathan  wrote:
>
> > Well, to Steven's point that you might need a jurisdiction where
> corporate
> > officers and employees aren't subject to extradition... I believe Germany
> > does in fact have an extradition treaty with the United States.
> >
>
> The chapters do seem like the obvious potentially viable easy
> solution here, if WMF set up that contingency plan.
>
> For instance, if WMDE did take over in an emergency, then the critical
> difference is that Germany doesn't extradite its own citizens to the US. So
> there'd just have to be a complete handoff of primary hosting to outside
> the US and some kind of agreement for WMDE (or pick your chapter) to take
> over operational control. There's probably a lot that real lawyers, of
> which I am not one, would know better here.
>
>
> > So far the criteria I'm hearing from the comments here:
> >
> > 1) Politically stable
> > 2) Liberal political environment
> > 3) Strong protections against government interference in relevant
> > operations
> > 4) Section 230-like protection against liability for user content
> > 5) No natural disasters like fires, floods, hurricanes, volcanoes, etc.
> > 6) Strong technological sophistication - preferably a robust technology
> > industry that can supply local talent for WMF needs
> > 7) Protections in the law for data privacy
> > 8) Availability of renewable energy sources and other resources that
> allow
> > for operation of the WMF with a low climate impact
> > 9) Tax exemption or beneficial tax structure for receiving international
> > fundings by donation
> > 10) Clear and reliable regulatory framework for a charitable organization
> > 11) Safe - low crime, low-risk of violence for WMF stakeholders and
> > community
> > 12) Free from risk of extradition to the U.S. or other jurisdictions
> where
> > criminal or civil law might be used against WMF officers or employees
> >
> > I would guess the list of countries that meet all of these criteria might
> > be short. Norway might 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resolution to pause Movement Brand Project through March 2021

[Zack McCune]

Thank you María!

Following this Board resolution, the Brand Project team will be updating
the project hub. [1]  We will also release the Naming Survey results as
both a report and as the anonymized data by October 6. The publication of
those materials will be shared on the project hub and announced here.


Cheers,

- Zack, Essie, and Samir (the Brand Project team)


[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 12:51 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <
galder...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks for hearing the voices, María and members of the board.
>
> Defining common goals is the best practice for reaching to the best
> solution.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Galder
> 
> From: Wikimedia-l  on behalf of
> María Sefidari 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 9:47 PM
> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Resolution to pause Movement Brand Project through
> March 2021
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees, following the recommendation of
> staff, has resolved to pause the Movement Brand Project until the next
> calendar year.[1] We recognize that much of the Wikimedia movement’s
> activities, events, and key collaborations have been put on hold or
> restructured due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and we have received formal
> requests to pause Movement Brand Project activities to reflect this
> need.[2]
>
> The Board remains persuaded that there is potential value in making change
> to our branding system in service of our goals of engaging more people in
> our mission. However, we also know that change moves at the speed of trust.
> We have asked staff to meaningfully engage with community concerns and
> address the request for equitable decision-making within the process. We
> also ask members of the community to use this pause to consider how equity
> may ask us to let go of some aspects of our past, in order to create space
> for what could be. Making these decisions together, with so many passionate
> perspectives, will be challenging, but building this capacity is essential
> for how we grow together as a thriving global movement.
>
> In the meantime, we will establish a small ad-hoc Board committee to liaise
> with staff, and develop a process of collaboration and decision-making
> appropriate for the Movement’s brand. This committee will constitute
> Trustees James Heilman, Raju Narisetti, and Shani Evenstein Sigalov. We
> hope and intend for this committee to include a small number of community
> representatives from affiliates, open letter signatories, and emerging
> communities, and Foundation staff to be designated by the Executive
> Director. We’ll update you with more details on the committee soon.
>
> In 2021, using insights and recommendations gleaned through the ad-hoc
> committee, the Brand Project team will restart collaboration and
> communicate next steps accordingly. This resolution was ratified on
> September 24, 2020.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> María Sefidari
>
> [1]
>
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Pause_of_Brand_Development_Work
>
> [2]  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_open_letter_on_renaming
>
>
> --
>
> María Sefidari Huici
>
> Chair of the Board
>
> Wikimedia Foundation 
> ___
> 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@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
> ___
> 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@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>


-- 

Zack McCune (he/him)

Director of Brand

Wikimedia Foundation 
___
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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Resolution to pause Movement Brand Project through March 2021

[María Sefidari]

 Hi everyone,

The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees, following the recommendation of
staff, has resolved to pause the Movement Brand Project until the next
calendar year.[1] We recognize that much of the Wikimedia movement’s
activities, events, and key collaborations have been put on hold or
restructured due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and we have received formal
requests to pause Movement Brand Project activities to reflect this
need.[2]

The Board remains persuaded that there is potential value in making change
to our branding system in service of our goals of engaging more people in
our mission. However, we also know that change moves at the speed of trust.
We have asked staff to meaningfully engage with community concerns and
address the request for equitable decision-making within the process. We
also ask members of the community to use this pause to consider how equity
may ask us to let go of some aspects of our past, in order to create space
for what could be. Making these decisions together, with so many passionate
perspectives, will be challenging, but building this capacity is essential
for how we grow together as a thriving global movement.

In the meantime, we will establish a small ad-hoc Board committee to liaise
with staff, and develop a process of collaboration and decision-making
appropriate for the Movement’s brand. This committee will constitute
Trustees James Heilman, Raju Narisetti, and Shani Evenstein Sigalov. We
hope and intend for this committee to include a small number of community
representatives from affiliates, open letter signatories, and emerging
communities, and Foundation staff to be designated by the Executive
Director. We’ll update you with more details on the committee soon.

In 2021, using insights and recommendations gleaned through the ad-hoc
committee, the Brand Project team will restart collaboration and
communicate next steps accordingly. This resolution was ratified on
September 24, 2020.

Kind regards,

María Sefidari

[1]
https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Pause_of_Brand_Development_Work

[2]  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_open_letter_on_renaming


-- 

María Sefidari Huici

Chair of the Board

Wikimedia Foundation 
___
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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Steven Walling]

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 12:22 PM Nathan  wrote:

> Well, to Steven's point that you might need a jurisdiction where corporate
> officers and employees aren't subject to extradition... I believe Germany
> does in fact have an extradition treaty with the United States.
>

The chapters do seem like the obvious potentially viable easy
solution here, if WMF set up that contingency plan.

For instance, if WMDE did take over in an emergency, then the critical
difference is that Germany doesn't extradite its own citizens to the US. So
there'd just have to be a complete handoff of primary hosting to outside
the US and some kind of agreement for WMDE (or pick your chapter) to take
over operational control. There's probably a lot that real lawyers, of
which I am not one, would know better here.


> So far the criteria I'm hearing from the comments here:
>
> 1) Politically stable
> 2) Liberal political environment
> 3) Strong protections against government interference in relevant
> operations
> 4) Section 230-like protection against liability for user content
> 5) No natural disasters like fires, floods, hurricanes, volcanoes, etc.
> 6) Strong technological sophistication - preferably a robust technology
> industry that can supply local talent for WMF needs
> 7) Protections in the law for data privacy
> 8) Availability of renewable energy sources and other resources that allow
> for operation of the WMF with a low climate impact
> 9) Tax exemption or beneficial tax structure for receiving international
> fundings by donation
> 10) Clear and reliable regulatory framework for a charitable organization
> 11) Safe - low crime, low-risk of violence for WMF stakeholders and
> community
> 12) Free from risk of extradition to the U.S. or other jurisdictions where
> criminal or civil law might be used against WMF officers or employees
>
> I would guess the list of countries that meet all of these criteria might
> be short. Norway might hit most of these except the last.
>

The only item that seems more or less impossible is preventing 5 in light
of the impacts of climate change. There is no locale on the planet that
won't suffer from severe weather and natural disasters, just some (like the
poorer countries and anywhere in the tropics) that will see worse impacts.
So the only nuance is aiming for more like "Prepared for the event of
severe weather and natural disasters" not "none".

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 2:44 PM Michael Peel  wrote:
>
> > … hence the existence of Wikimedia chapters? I suspect at least WMDE
> could
> > take this on if it becomes necessary, although other chapters aren’t as
> > technologically developed as I’d have liked to have seen.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mike
> >
> > > On 30 Sep 2020, at 19:35, Steven Walling 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > SJ hinted at a related problem which is that we'd also need a backup
> > > organizational structure to run things operationally and legally. If
> the
> > US
> > > becomes so politically unstable that hosting Wikimedia data is under
> > threat
> > > there, just moving the data would not be enough. You'd also have to
> > include
> > > a contingency plan that foresaw the need to legally operate the
> > Foundation
> > > (or an equivalent organization anyway) under a different jurisdiction
> > > with corporate officers not subject to US law or extradition. If the
> > > servers are hosted in the EU but the legally controlling body and its
> > > employees are within the US, you could still see them legally forced to
> > > comply with an order, just like companies are forced to do so in
> > > other countries with censorious regimes today.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 8:59 AM Samuel Klein 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> We should have technical partners in multiple other jurisdictions that
> > >> could help in a crisis, and load bearing infrastructure in at least
> one
> > of
> > >> them, and a plan for how and when to switch. (The walkthrough of what
> > would
> > >> be needed for a smooth transfer send most important, and useful for
> > general
> > >> reliability planning)
> > >>
> > >> We should also fully support and realize Wikimedia-on-ipfs, similar to
> > what
> > >> the internet archive had been doing. (Santhosh has some excellent
> ideas
> > >> there)
> > >>
> > >> 
> > >>
> > >> On Wed., Sep. 30, 2020, 5:35 a.m. Dan Garry (Deskana), <
> > djgw...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller 
> > wrote:
> > >>>
> >  I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
> >  developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
> >  the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
> > 
> > >>>
> > >>> I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were
> > >> threats
> > >>> to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a
> > >> blackout
> > >>> [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could
> > >> well
> > >>> get larger and more 

[Wikimedia-l] Office hour: Community Resilience & Sustainability/ T

[Maggie Dennis]

Hello, all.

I am Maggie Dennis, Vice President of Community Resilience &
Sustainability, working directly under the General Counsel of the Wikimedia
Foundation.[1] I've served in various roles at the Foundation over the past
9 years, always in and about the Trust & Safety team. I'm also a volunteer
— Moonriddengirl — editing mostly on the English Wikipedia (though much
less than in the past).

Back in June, we held the first of a series of quarterly office hours which
were intended to provide a space for folks to talk to me directly about
issues involving "community resilience and sustainability", which includes
the Trust & Safety team's activity as well as initiatives such as the
Universal Code of Conduct and the Human Rights role for which we’re
currently hiring. You can read the notes from the previous call here!

[2]

As with last time, in order to meet the request of some to make these
meetings more personal, we're going to again host the meeting on Zoom,
taking questions from the Zoom chat, Telegram, and IRC, as well as
collecting them in advance over email.[3] The meeting will also be streamed
to YouTube, since we will only be able to host a limited number of people
in the Zoom itself, and this recording will be available to watch after
we're done.

As with last time around, finding one hour that works for everyone is going
to be really difficult, though we will once again be taking detailed
(anonymized) notes from the call which we'll be posting onto Meta-Wiki.
I'll be fielding questions from Wikimedians in good standing (that is, not
Foundation or community banned), and will follow up with anything asked
during or prior to the meeting that I can't get to during the meeting in
writing after the call.

The caveats from before remain in place, which I will repeat for
convenience:


   -

   I can't and won't discuss specific Trust & Safety cases. Instead, I can
   discuss Trust & Safety protocols and practices and approaches as well as
   some of the mistakes we've made, some of the things I'm proud of, and some
   of the things we're hoping to do.
   -

   I will not respond to comments or questions that are disrespectful to
   me, to my colleagues, or to anyone in our communities. I can talk civilly
   about our work even if you disagree with me or I disagree with you. I won't
   compromise on this.


I'm still not sure if Zoom is a permanent solution for these office hours,
though it has in the past been a good option to provide both text and audio
options for those who are interested in contributing. It's also software
that the Foundation's IT folks are familiar with and can help with in a
pinch should we run into any turbulence. :)

We don't yet have direct links set up for the call — those will be provided
when they are available. If you want the link to get in, please ask for it
at answ...@wikimedia.org, at least an hour in advance of the meeting's
start (please use "Trust & Safety" as the subject line - it’s quicker and
easier to remember than Community Resilience & Sustainability). The link
will be sent out via email during the hour before the meeting.

The meeting will be on October 15 at 18:00 UTC — here's a timezone
converter to work out when that is for you:
https://zonestamp.toolforge.org/1602784823

I hope to see you there.

Best,

Maggie

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Mdennis_(WMF)

[2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours/Office_hours_2020-06-04

[3] Zoom link forthcoming; Telegram link:
https://t.me/joinchat/DOlGIB1FRLUWqW9iB3qfTQ;

directions for participating in IRC:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours#How_to_participate; email
questions to answ...@wikimedia.org with "Trust & Safety" in the subject line


-- 
Maggie Dennis
Vice President, Community Resilience & Sustainability
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
___
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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Nathan]

Well, to Steven's point that you might need a jurisdiction where corporate
officers and employees aren't subject to extradition... I believe Germany
does in fact have an extradition treaty with the United States.

So far the criteria I'm hearing from the comments here:

1) Politically stable
2) Liberal political environment
3) Strong protections against government interference in relevant operations
4) Section 230-like protection against liability for user content
5) No natural disasters like fires, floods, hurricanes, volcanoes, etc.
6) Strong technological sophistication - preferably a robust technology
industry that can supply local talent for WMF needs
7) Protections in the law for data privacy
8) Availability of renewable energy sources and other resources that allow
for operation of the WMF with a low climate impact
9) Tax exemption or beneficial tax structure for receiving international
fundings by donation
10) Clear and reliable regulatory framework for a charitable organization
11) Safe - low crime, low-risk of violence for WMF stakeholders and
community
12) Free from risk of extradition to the U.S. or other jurisdictions where
criminal or civil law might be used against WMF officers or employees

I would guess the list of countries that meet all of these criteria might
be short. Norway might hit most of these except the last.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 2:44 PM Michael Peel  wrote:

> … hence the existence of Wikimedia chapters? I suspect at least WMDE could
> take this on if it becomes necessary, although other chapters aren’t as
> technologically developed as I’d have liked to have seen.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
> > On 30 Sep 2020, at 19:35, Steven Walling 
> wrote:
> >
> > SJ hinted at a related problem which is that we'd also need a backup
> > organizational structure to run things operationally and legally. If the
> US
> > becomes so politically unstable that hosting Wikimedia data is under
> threat
> > there, just moving the data would not be enough. You'd also have to
> include
> > a contingency plan that foresaw the need to legally operate the
> Foundation
> > (or an equivalent organization anyway) under a different jurisdiction
> > with corporate officers not subject to US law or extradition. If the
> > servers are hosted in the EU but the legally controlling body and its
> > employees are within the US, you could still see them legally forced to
> > comply with an order, just like companies are forced to do so in
> > other countries with censorious regimes today.
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 8:59 AM Samuel Klein  wrote:
> >
> >> We should have technical partners in multiple other jurisdictions that
> >> could help in a crisis, and load bearing infrastructure in at least one
> of
> >> them, and a plan for how and when to switch. (The walkthrough of what
> would
> >> be needed for a smooth transfer send most important, and useful for
> general
> >> reliability planning)
> >>
> >> We should also fully support and realize Wikimedia-on-ipfs, similar to
> what
> >> the internet archive had been doing. (Santhosh has some excellent ideas
> >> there)
> >>
> >> 
> >>
> >> On Wed., Sep. 30, 2020, 5:35 a.m. Dan Garry (Deskana), <
> djgw...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller 
> wrote:
> >>>
>  I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
>  developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
>  the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
> 
> >>>
> >>> I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were
> >> threats
> >>> to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a
> >> blackout
> >>> [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could
> >> well
> >>> get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent,
> >> should
> >>> someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on
> attacking
> >>> Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a
> contingency
> >>> plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
> >>> operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
> >>> advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily
> advocate
> >>> for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
> >>> merely to know it exists.
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon 
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
>  I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but
> right
> >>> now
>  legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now
> and
> >>> the
>  foreseeable future.
> 
> >>>
> >>> I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best
> place
> >>> for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be
> actively
> >>> considered.
> >>>
> >>> Dan
> >>>
> >>> [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
> >>> [2]:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Michael Peel]

… hence the existence of Wikimedia chapters? I suspect at least WMDE could take 
this on if it becomes necessary, although other chapters aren’t as 
technologically developed as I’d have liked to have seen.

Thanks,
Mike

> On 30 Sep 2020, at 19:35, Steven Walling  wrote:
> 
> SJ hinted at a related problem which is that we'd also need a backup
> organizational structure to run things operationally and legally. If the US
> becomes so politically unstable that hosting Wikimedia data is under threat
> there, just moving the data would not be enough. You'd also have to include
> a contingency plan that foresaw the need to legally operate the Foundation
> (or an equivalent organization anyway) under a different jurisdiction
> with corporate officers not subject to US law or extradition. If the
> servers are hosted in the EU but the legally controlling body and its
> employees are within the US, you could still see them legally forced to
> comply with an order, just like companies are forced to do so in
> other countries with censorious regimes today.
> 
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 8:59 AM Samuel Klein  wrote:
> 
>> We should have technical partners in multiple other jurisdictions that
>> could help in a crisis, and load bearing infrastructure in at least one of
>> them, and a plan for how and when to switch. (The walkthrough of what would
>> be needed for a smooth transfer send most important, and useful for general
>> reliability planning)
>> 
>> We should also fully support and realize Wikimedia-on-ipfs, similar to what
>> the internet archive had been doing. (Santhosh has some excellent ideas
>> there)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed., Sep. 30, 2020, 5:35 a.m. Dan Garry (Deskana), 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller  wrote:
>>> 
 I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
 developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
 the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
 
>>> 
>>> I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were
>> threats
>>> to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a
>> blackout
>>> [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could
>> well
>>> get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent,
>> should
>>> someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking
>>> Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency
>>> plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
>>> operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
>>> advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate
>>> for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
>>> merely to know it exists.
>>> 
>>> On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right
>>> now
 legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and
>>> the
 foreseeable future.
 
>>> 
>>> I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place
>>> for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively
>>> considered.
>>> 
>>> Dan
>>> 
>>> [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
>>> [2]:
>>> 
>>> 
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_community
>>> ___
>>> 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@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> 
>>> 
>> ___
>> 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@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>> 
> ___
> 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@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 


___
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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Steven Walling]

SJ hinted at a related problem which is that we'd also need a backup
organizational structure to run things operationally and legally. If the US
becomes so politically unstable that hosting Wikimedia data is under threat
there, just moving the data would not be enough. You'd also have to include
a contingency plan that foresaw the need to legally operate the Foundation
(or an equivalent organization anyway) under a different jurisdiction
with corporate officers not subject to US law or extradition. If the
servers are hosted in the EU but the legally controlling body and its
employees are within the US, you could still see them legally forced to
comply with an order, just like companies are forced to do so in
other countries with censorious regimes today.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 8:59 AM Samuel Klein  wrote:

> We should have technical partners in multiple other jurisdictions that
> could help in a crisis, and load bearing infrastructure in at least one of
> them, and a plan for how and when to switch. (The walkthrough of what would
> be needed for a smooth transfer send most important, and useful for general
> reliability planning)
>
> We should also fully support and realize Wikimedia-on-ipfs, similar to what
> the internet archive had been doing. (Santhosh has some excellent ideas
> there)
>
> 
>
> On Wed., Sep. 30, 2020, 5:35 a.m. Dan Garry (Deskana), 
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller  wrote:
> >
> > > I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
> > > developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
> > > the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
> > >
> >
> > I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were
> threats
> > to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a
> blackout
> > [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could
> well
> > get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent,
> should
> > someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking
> > Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency
> > plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
> > operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
> > advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate
> > for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
> > merely to know it exists.
> >
> > On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right
> > now
> > > legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and
> > the
> > > foreseeable future.
> > >
> >
> > I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place
> > for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively
> > considered.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
> > [2]:
> >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_community
> > ___
> > 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@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> 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@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] The Signpost – Volume 16, Issue 9 – 27 September 2020

[Wikipedia Signpost]

Special report: Paid editing with political connections
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-09-27/Special_report


News and notes: More large-scale errors at a "small" wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-09-27/News_and_notes


In the media: WIPO, Seigenthaler incident 15 years later
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-09-27/In_the_media


Featured content: Life finds a Way
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-09-27/Featured_content


Arbitration report: Clarifications and requests
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-09-27/Arbitration_report


Traffic report: Is there no justice?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-09-27/Traffic_report


Recent research: Wikipedia's flood biases
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-09-27/Recent_research



Single-page view

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signpost/Single



https://facebook.com/wikisignpost

https://twitter.com/wikisignpost



-- 
*Signpost* team
___
Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed 
to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more 
information about Wikimedia-l:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
___
WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
___
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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Samuel Klein]

We should have technical partners in multiple other jurisdictions that
could help in a crisis, and load bearing infrastructure in at least one of
them, and a plan for how and when to switch. (The walkthrough of what would
be needed for a smooth transfer send most important, and useful for general
reliability planning)

We should also fully support and realize Wikimedia-on-ipfs, similar to what
the internet archive had been doing. (Santhosh has some excellent ideas
there)



On Wed., Sep. 30, 2020, 5:35 a.m. Dan Garry (Deskana), 
wrote:

> On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller  wrote:
>
> > I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
> > developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
> > the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
> >
>
> I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were threats
> to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a blackout
> [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could well
> get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent, should
> someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking
> Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency
> plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
> operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
> advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate
> for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
> merely to know it exists.
>
> On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon 
> wrote:
>
> > I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right
> now
> > legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and
> the
> > foreseeable future.
> >
>
> I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place
> for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively
> considered.
>
> Dan
>
> [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
> [2]:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_community
> ___
> 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@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Pascal Martin]

Hi all, 


Maybe one way in France :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renater 


I could contact them if it s possible, and more particularly the criann
he would only charge for electricity.
At the same time this allows to be able to save energy for users who
consult wikipedia in Europe.

https://www.criann.fr/

Le 2020-09-30 13:12, Gereon Kalkuhl a écrit :


Hi all,

as Dimi said, there had been some discussions about this topic over the years. 
Unfortunately they were not taken for serious, for example 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Move_the_WMF_and_Servers_to_Iceland
 .

And there is not only the political issue, there are environmental concerns as 
well. Earthquakes and fires in California, Hurricanes in the South.

Cheers, Gereon

Am 30.09.2020 um 11:44 schrieb Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov: Hi all,

We have had discussions on this with many Wikimedians over the years, but
frankly, the issue never seemed pressing enough to pursue more seriously.
Some points made that I remember where:

- Perhaps it is enough to just have back-up servers in another
jurisdictions that could kick-in and whose capacity could quickly be
upgraded in case of need.
- Nordic jurisdictions like Iceland and Norway frequently came up with
the arguments: stable political systems, solid digital rights track
records, a climate that helps save energy on cooling servers & availability
of hydropower (i.e. environmental benefits).

I think such a move would require serious studies and long, community-wide
debates. I can not assess how urgent it is. But then again, waiting until
it is a real issue is probably not a great idea.

Cheers,
Dimi

На ср, 30.09.2020 г. в 11:35 Dan Garry (Deskana)  написа:

On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller  wrote:

I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.

I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were threats
to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1 [1]] which lead to a blackout
[2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could well
get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent, should
someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking
Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency
plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate
for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
merely to know it exists.

On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon 
wrote:

I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right now 
legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and the 
foreseeable future.

I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place
for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively
considered.

Dan

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
[2]:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_community
___
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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,


___
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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 


___
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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 


--
Cordialement
Pascal Martin
06 13 89 77 32 


Links:
--
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
___
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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Gereon Kalkuhl]

Hi all,

as Dimi said, there had been some discussions about this topic over the 
years. Unfortunately they were not taken for serious, for example 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Move_the_WMF_and_Servers_to_Iceland 
.


And there is not only the political issue, there are environmental 
concerns as well. Earthquakes and fires in California, Hurricanes in the 
South.


Cheers, Gereon

Am 30.09.2020 um 11:44 schrieb Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov:

Hi all,

We have had discussions on this with many Wikimedians over the years, but
frankly, the issue never seemed pressing enough to pursue more seriously.
Some points made that I remember where:


- Perhaps it is enough to just have back-up servers in another
jurisdictions that could kick-in and whose capacity could quickly be
upgraded in case of need.
- Nordic jurisdictions like Iceland and Norway frequently came up with
the arguments: stable political systems, solid digital rights track
records, a climate that helps save energy on cooling servers & availability
of hydropower (i.e. environmental benefits).

I think such a move would require serious studies and long, community-wide
debates. I can not assess how urgent it is. But then again, waiting until
it is a real issue is probably not a great idea.

Cheers,
Dimi

На ср, 30.09.2020 г. в 11:35 Dan Garry (Deskana)  написа:


On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller  wrote:


I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.


I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were threats
to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a blackout
[2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could well
get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent, should
someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking
Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency
plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate
for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
merely to know it exists.

On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon 
wrote:


I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right

now

legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and

the

foreseeable future.


I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place
for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively
considered.

Dan

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
[2]:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_community
___
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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,



___
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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 




___
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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Gnangarra]

I agree there does a appear to be a need for the WMF and Board to consider
a contingency plan, does it need to be public? I'm not as convinced.

Privacy is just one of many questions that would have to be addressed, with
that being said it's important. There are other equally important needs
from copyright to freedom of speech to financial to social  and political
stability.

When it comes to privacy how many of us are using, Google, Microsoft,
Apple products, or even other services that  have a global presence.  While
many of us are concerned about the potential for political actions every
country is grappling with the corporate, tax, and privacy issues related to
these companies as well.  Politically Trump style leadership is a concern,
not just in the USA but right across what were politically stable
countries.

It'd be remiss of the WMF if they already didn't have alternative servers(I
know they do) and backups outside San Francisco, and Florida given the
susceptibility of both locations to natural disasters and climate change
issues.  All of these make it beyond the capability of the community to
effectively evaluate in a public forum like this.  The best the community
this can do in this space is to give support to the WMF and the Board to
explore, evaluate, and follow the dynamics of political realities of where
a move could go because any change will need to be immediately effective,
If was to become necessary to take such actions to protect the movement and
knowledge we have collected  a long drawn out debate will be out of the
questions, and decisions made today, this month, this year could in all
likelihood be just as invalid.

On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 18:01, Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov <
dimitar.parvanov.dimit...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> We have had discussions on this with many Wikimedians over the years, but
> frankly, the issue never seemed pressing enough to pursue more seriously.
> Some points made that I remember where:
>
>
>- Perhaps it is enough to just have back-up servers in another
>jurisdictions that could kick-in and whose capacity could quickly be
>upgraded in case of need.
>- Nordic jurisdictions like Iceland and Norway frequently came up with
>the arguments: stable political systems, solid digital rights track
>records, a climate that helps save energy on cooling servers &
> availability
>of hydropower (i.e. environmental benefits).
>
> I think such a move would require serious studies and long, community-wide
> debates. I can not assess how urgent it is. But then again, waiting until
> it is a real issue is probably not a great idea.
>
> Cheers,
> Dimi
>
> На ср, 30.09.2020 г. в 11:35 Dan Garry (Deskana) 
> написа:
>
> > On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller  wrote:
> >
> > > I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
> > > developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
> > > the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
> > >
> >
> > I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were
> threats
> > to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a
> blackout
> > [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could
> well
> > get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent,
> should
> > someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking
> > Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency
> > plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
> > operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
> > advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate
> > for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
> > merely to know it exists.
> >
> > On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right
> > now
> > > legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and
> > the
> > > foreseeable future.
> > >
> >
> > I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place
> > for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively
> > considered.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
> > [2]:
> >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_community
> > ___
> > 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@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov]

Hi all,

We have had discussions on this with many Wikimedians over the years, but
frankly, the issue never seemed pressing enough to pursue more seriously.
Some points made that I remember where:


   - Perhaps it is enough to just have back-up servers in another
   jurisdictions that could kick-in and whose capacity could quickly be
   upgraded in case of need.
   - Nordic jurisdictions like Iceland and Norway frequently came up with
   the arguments: stable political systems, solid digital rights track
   records, a climate that helps save energy on cooling servers & availability
   of hydropower (i.e. environmental benefits).

I think such a move would require serious studies and long, community-wide
debates. I can not assess how urgent it is. But then again, waiting until
it is a real issue is probably not a great idea.

Cheers,
Dimi

На ср, 30.09.2020 г. в 11:35 Dan Garry (Deskana)  написа:

> On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller  wrote:
>
> > I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
> > developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
> > the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
> >
>
> I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were threats
> to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a blackout
> [2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could well
> get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent, should
> someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking
> Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency
> plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
> operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
> advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate
> for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
> merely to know it exists.
>
> On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon 
> wrote:
>
> > I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right
> now
> > legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and
> the
> > foreseeable future.
> >
>
> I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place
> for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively
> considered.
>
> Dan
>
> [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
> [2]:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_community
> ___
> 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@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Dan Garry (Deskana)]

On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 09:49, Erik Moeller  wrote:

> I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
> developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
> the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.
>

I agree with Erik. Even under the Obama administration, there were threats
to the existence of the movement, such as SOPA [1] which lead to a blackout
[2]. One can extrapolate from current events that these threats could well
get larger and more frequent, rather than smaller and less frequent, should
someone in the US Government decide to focus their attention on attacking
Wikipedia and free knowledge. It would be prudent to create a contingency
plan which includes an exploration of other options for a location of
operation for the Wikimedia Foundation and/or its servers, with their
advantages and disadvantages. I personally wouldn't necessarily advocate
for making the plan public; that would be ideal, but I'd be comforted
merely to know it exists.

On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 23:36, Joseph Seddon  wrote:

> I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right now
> legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now and the
> foreseeable future.
>

I agree with this too. For now, the United States remains the best place
for the organisation to operate out of, and a move should not be actively
considered.

Dan

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act
[2]:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA#Wikimedia_community
___
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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Reminder - Review of the draft for a Universal Code of Conduct

[Christel Steigenberger]

Hello everyone,

We want to remind everyone that only your ideas and thoughts on the
improvement of the draft for the Universal Code of Conduct are welcome.[1]
The feedback will be collected until October 6th, when the drafting
committee[2] will begin final preparations for sharing with the Board.

A lot of people from different communities have left their comments
already. We are very happy to see many constructive suggestions for
improvement and helpful feedback from editors from around the world.

The drafting committee is hard at work on revisions and processing all the
input from the different language communities alongside with the feedback
given on the English language draft. They have posted an update on the UCoC
Draft review page, and are very appreciative of the detailed requests for
improvement supplied so far.

Please join the conversation and encourage others to do the same before
October 6 to ensure they enter the Board report. You can leave your
feedback here: <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Draft_review>

To learn more about the UCoC project, see the Universal Code of Conduct page

, and the FAQs

 and <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Universal_Code_of_Conduct#A_small_FAQ_about_UCoC
>, on Meta. and <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Universal_Code_of_Conduct#A_small_FAQ_about_UCoC
>, on Meta.

Looking forward to your input,

Christel Steigenberger


[1] >

[2] <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Drafting_committee
>

Christel Steigenberger (she/her)

Trust and Safety Specialist

Wikimedia Foundation 
___
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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

[Erik Moeller]

On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 3:36 PM Joseph Seddon  wrote:

> I believe options are going to be explored for sustainability but right now
> legally speaking the US is the best jurisdiction for hosting us now

Certainly.

> and the foreseeable future.

I can't foresee the future. But Trump's first term in office is very
troubling. Relentless attacks on journalists, escalation of political
violence, attempts to undermine Section 230 protections, attempts to
remove apps from app stores by Executive Order, etc.  -- checked by a
judiciary that's increasingly aligned with the Trump agenda. That's
the United States today. From this we can extrapolate plausible
scenarios in which the question where to locate Wikimedia's core
assets could become the single most urgent strategic question the
movement faces.

I hope that some preliminary contingency plans exist or are being
developed, and I'm sure that the movement-wide debate will widen if
the US continues its downward slide into authoritarianism.

Erik

___
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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,