Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
On Nov 28, 2012 11:05 PM, Andrew Turvey andrewrtur...@googlemail.com wrote: Credit checking, besides the costs, would require consent and can damage their credit rating so I would strongly advise against that. Just to clarify, it wouldn't actually be a credit check. It would be using a credit agency's database to verify an identity. It wouldn't appear on a credit report as an attempt to get credit - it's a separate service designed for exactly this kind of thing. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
Morning all, So, I'm sensing that while there is some acceptance that a bit more gatekeeping may be warranted, we don't want anything heavy handed, and that verifying identity prior to voting each time isn't practicable. How do we feel about Jon's suggestion of confirming address? I can easily set up a join process whereby: 1. Member indicates wanting to join by filling out application form (online or paper) 2. Office logs application on Civi CRM and sends potential member a postcard and sticker in an envelope. Postcard has our freepost address on once side, and bullet points on the other side briefly explaining: 1. The membership approval process (some new members aren't always clear on being approved and the delay until the next round of approvals by the board) 2. Signposting to our events page in the meantime 3. That returning the card is an effective declaration that their address and name as provided are genuine (and they will undertake to update us if this changes) 4. That if they have not applied for membership they should inform us of the error via email 3. Member receives postcard at genuine address if given. Enjoys sticker (yay) and drops postcard into the post. 4. Office receives postcard, and marks address as verified against membership record. The downside if this approach is we can't verify that a person's name is what they have declared it is. However, the upsides are having not only verified they live where they say they do, but this being at a minimal expense, and providing more information and an opportunity to engage them early in the process. Currently becoming a member can be a bit underwhelming. Also, I should add, I strongly agree with the idea that the best overall way to combat the problem is to have a larger, more active membership, complemented by staff, Trustees and volunteers to continue to be alert to any unusual patterns of recruitment or behaviour in a new crop of unknown volunteers. I think this approach will add a layer of security to that however. Katherine On 21 November 2012 08:19, Gordon Joly gordon.j...@pobox.com wrote: On 20/11/12 20:12, Chris Keating wrote: Another step some organisations take is to say that someone has to be a member for a certain length of time before conferring voting rights on them, though the only time I've seen this is enacted is when there have been serious problems with people joining to push particular agendas. (Also worth nothing that this in our case would need an amendment to the Articles.) I am reminded that we have an EGM in the pipeline to change (or not) the voting processes of AGMs. Gordo __**_ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-lhttp://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org -- *Katherine Bavage * *Fundraising Manager * *Wikimedia UK* +44 20 7065 0949 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
The Postcard idea is good, but remember that a postcard isn't in an envelope, so please don't print anything more on it than the minimum needed for us to know which postcards have come back - i.e. a membership number. I would suggest that you also want something in the process to raise an alert when you have more than three members at an address, - this can of course be perfectly legit if the address is a University Hall of residence, but it can be a useful check. WSC On 22 November 2012 12:05, Katherine Bavage katherine.bav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Morning all, So, I'm sensing that while there is some acceptance that a bit more gatekeeping may be warranted, we don't want anything heavy handed, and that verifying identity prior to voting each time isn't practicable. How do we feel about Jon's suggestion of confirming address? I can easily set up a join process whereby: 1. Member indicates wanting to join by filling out application form (online or paper) 2. Office logs application on Civi CRM and sends potential member a postcard and sticker in an envelope. Postcard has our freepost address on once side, and bullet points on the other side briefly explaining: 1. The membership approval process (some new members aren't always clear on being approved and the delay until the next round of approvals by the board) 2. Signposting to our events page in the meantime 3. That returning the card is an effective declaration that their address and name as provided are genuine (and they will undertake to update us if this changes) 4. That if they have not applied for membership they should inform us of the error via email 3. Member receives postcard at genuine address if given. Enjoys sticker (yay) and drops postcard into the post. 4. Office receives postcard, and marks address as verified against membership record. The downside if this approach is we can't verify that a person's name is what they have declared it is. However, the upsides are having not only verified they live where they say they do, but this being at a minimal expense, and providing more information and an opportunity to engage them early in the process. Currently becoming a member can be a bit underwhelming. Also, I should add, I strongly agree with the idea that the best overall way to combat the problem is to have a larger, more active membership, complemented by staff, Trustees and volunteers to continue to be alert to any unusual patterns of recruitment or behaviour in a new crop of unknown volunteers. I think this approach will add a layer of security to that however. Katherine On 21 November 2012 08:19, Gordon Joly gordon.j...@pobox.com wrote: On 20/11/12 20:12, Chris Keating wrote: Another step some organisations take is to say that someone has to be a member for a certain length of time before conferring voting rights on them, though the only time I've seen this is enacted is when there have been serious problems with people joining to push particular agendas. (Also worth nothing that this in our case would need an amendment to the Articles.) I am reminded that we have an EGM in the pipeline to change (or not) the voting processes of AGMs. Gordo __**_ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-lhttp://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org -- *Katherine Bavage * *Fundraising Manager * *Wikimedia UK* +44 20 7065 0949 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
Just to put this into a real world perspective. I an a member of the Labour Party which gives me certain rights to vote. I've never once in 23 years been asked to provide evidence of who I am. In terms of entryism the Labour Party has had a long history and the problem is dealt with not with postcards or expensive credit checks or heaven forbid notorised copies of documents but with a simple acceptence that you abide by the constitution. If you don't you get kicked out and if you disagree you take the party to court at your own expense. For a post that has had so many contributions I haven't seen much justification for any change in what you do already. The fear of reds under the bed or freak cabals seems to more important that actually signing up members and supporters and bogging them down with what if requirements. Maybe an approach to another charity or the electoral reform society and ask how they deal with ghost members might be more enlightening, than throwing it open to a public mailing list. On 19/11/2012, Katherine Bavage katherine.bav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hi All, At the board meeting on Saturday a valid point was made that currently the verification process for membership applications doesn't really prove a barrier to fraudulent or duplicate applications. I'd like to look at ways of improving this, so as we aim to expand our membership numbers we're also making sure fairness is enshrined in a checking process that means people can only have one vote. If people pay their membership fee with Paypal, this isn't so much of a problem, as having a verified paypal account has already required this person to link their identity to their postal address - but we want to be as open as possible and so there will be people who give us 'a form and a fiver'. What checking processes do we think would be acceptable without being invasive/onerous? At a basic level, we should be confirming that the applicant is the named person at the address given. Please flag up concerns, suggestions for services or resources we can use, and so on. It may be that we can't completely eliminate the risk of fraudulent applications, but we can make it more difficult and provide a measure or reassurance that no individual has more power than any other by being able to vote twice etc . Thanks! -- *Katherine Bavage * *Fundraising Manager * *Wikimedia UK* +44 20 7065 0949 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
On 22 November 2012 12:44, michael west michaw...@gmail.com wrote: Just to put this into a real world perspective. I an a member of the Labour Party which gives me certain rights to vote. I've never once in 23 years been asked to provide evidence of who I am. In terms of entryism the Labour Party has had a long history and the problem is dealt with not with postcards or expensive credit checks or heaven forbid notorised copies of documents but with a simple acceptence that you abide by the constitution. If you don't you get kicked out and if you disagree you take the party to court at your own expense. For a post that has had so many contributions I haven't seen much justification for any change in what you do already. The fear of reds under the bed or freak cabals seems to more important that actually signing up members and supporters and bogging them down with what if requirements. Maybe an approach to another charity or the electoral reform society and ask how they deal with ghost members might be more enlightening, than throwing it open to a public mailing list. +1 The real solution is more members. - d. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
Just a few thoughts in reply. Yep, I'm a member of several organisations including a political party, as of course will be some of our Trustees, and true, not all of them verify applications but rely on the caveat of kicking people out if caught doing something 'naughty'. I don't think the rationale should be that we do things the same way, it certainly doesn't hurt to discuss alternatives. I can assure you we're fairly 'real world' about this. The concern arose from the fact that under the current system, fraudulent membership is possible - there are no effective safeguards. Perhaps the Trustees will decide this is an acceptable risk. Verifying new membership applications are valid isn't our primary concern - the 20 page membership report submitted to the board that is entirely dedicated to better understanding what our members want, delivering that, and therefore expanding our membership through strategic recruitment underlines the priorities. Do have a readhttp://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_UK_Membership_Development_report.pdf, and feel free to add any thoughts on my talk page. Approaching other organisations - naturally that's something I'm already doing. I've asked the mailing list as well because many of it subscribers are concerned and interested parties when it comes to how the Chapter is run and I value their feedback on matters like this - good and bad. I'll certainly factor in the comments of respondents who aren't pro any checking such as yours in my feedback to Trustees. Kat On 22 November 2012 12:58, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 22 November 2012 12:44, michael west michaw...@gmail.com wrote: Just to put this into a real world perspective. I an a member of the Labour Party which gives me certain rights to vote. I've never once in 23 years been asked to provide evidence of who I am. In terms of entryism the Labour Party has had a long history and the problem is dealt with not with postcards or expensive credit checks or heaven forbid notorised copies of documents but with a simple acceptence that you abide by the constitution. If you don't you get kicked out and if you disagree you take the party to court at your own expense. For a post that has had so many contributions I haven't seen much justification for any change in what you do already. The fear of reds under the bed or freak cabals seems to more important that actually signing up members and supporters and bogging them down with what if requirements. Maybe an approach to another charity or the electoral reform society and ask how they deal with ghost members might be more enlightening, than throwing it open to a public mailing list. +1 The real solution is more members. - d. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org -- *Katherine Bavage * *Fundraising Manager * *Wikimedia UK* +44 20 7065 0949 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
On 22/11/12 12:05, Katherine Bavage wrote: How do we feel about Jon's suggestion of confirming address? Suppose a group with funds wish to influence a body. They pay for the membership fees (and a little on the side for goodwill). All these schemes will not uncover that scam. Gordo ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
On 22 November 2012 14:12, Gordon Joly gordon.j...@pobox.com wrote: Suppose a group with funds wish to influence a body. They pay for the membership fees (and a little on the side for goodwill). All these schemes will not uncover that scam. Our threat model here is dedicated Internet trolls. They tend not to include winners at life, and aren't overflowing with surplus cash. - d. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_probability We get enough of that from the board, thanks Gordon. Harry Mitchell http://enwp.org/User:HJ Phone: 024 7698 0977 Skype: harry_j_mitchell From: Gordon Joly gordon.j...@pobox.com To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Thursday, 22 November 2012, 14:12 Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments On 22/11/12 12:05, Katherine Bavage wrote: How do we feel about Jon's suggestion of confirming address? Suppose a group with funds wish to influence a body. They pay for the membership fees (and a little on the side for goodwill). All these schemes will not uncover that scam. Gordo ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
On 20/11/12 20:12, Chris Keating wrote: Another step some organisations take is to say that someone has to be a member for a certain length of time before conferring voting rights on them, though the only time I've seen this is enacted is when there have been serious problems with people joining to push particular agendas. (Also worth nothing that this in our case would need an amendment to the Articles.) I am reminded that we have an EGM in the pipeline to change (or not) the voting processes of AGMs. Gordo ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
Morning - All members are voting members...unless I've missed something? Yes, the credit checking thing occurred to me but seemed a little excessive - plus it would complicate our obligations in terms of possible data protection (if it was part managed by staff) or I suspect would be really expensive. I suppose what we need to demonstrate is that, say 'Joe Bloggs' is a) Is who he says he is (proof of photo ID) and b) Lives at the address he says he does (utility bill? Electoral roll?). If people pay from a verified paypal account the need to check is superseded, because Paypal requires all this information. Finally, not sure whether we are strictly legally obliged or not is the point - even if we aren't, 'should we put some safeguard against entryism/vote fraud in place' is the premise on which I've been asked to raise the issue. Kat On 19 November 2012 17:15, Harry Burt harryab...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Katherine Bavage katherine.bav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hey Harry, I'm not sure if ii) *is* easier. Compare the work of verifying members before every AGM and EGM or merely at the point of joining. We don't really have formal check on membership at the moment - no applicant is asked to prove their residency at their address of that they have provided their real name. It depends, I suppose, on what kind of check you have in mind. I was imagining show us proof of identity (with a large burden on the information supplier) rather than a cheap automated check. By cheap I also mean monetarily: it's probably not a good use of WMUK money verifying the addresses of non-voting members if WMUK is not legally obliged to. Harry (User:Jarry1250) ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org -- *Katherine Bavage * *Fundraising Manager * *Wikimedia UK* +44 20 7065 0949 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
Are you sure PayPal require that?? I have a verified PayPal account and it only involved confirming my bank account via a £1 payment... No Id needed :-) Tom Morton On 20 Nov 2012, at 10:37, Katherine Bavage katherine.bav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Morning - All members are voting members...unless I've missed something? Yes, the credit checking thing occurred to me but seemed a little excessive - plus it would complicate our obligations in terms of possible data protection (if it was part managed by staff) or I suspect would be really expensive. I suppose what we need to demonstrate is that, say 'Joe Bloggs' is a) Is who he says he is (proof of photo ID) and b) Lives at the address he says he does (utility bill? Electoral roll?). If people pay from a verified paypal account the need to check is superseded, because Paypal requires all this information. Finally, not sure whether we are strictly legally obliged or not is the point - even if we aren't, 'should we put some safeguard against entryism/vote fraud in place' is the premise on which I've been asked to raise the issue. Kat On 19 November 2012 17:15, Harry Burt harryab...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Katherine Bavage katherine.bav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hey Harry, I'm not sure if ii) *is* easier. Compare the work of verifying members before every AGM and EGM or merely at the point of joining. We don't really have formal check on membership at the moment - no applicant is asked to prove their residency at their address of that they have provided their real name. It depends, I suppose, on what kind of check you have in mind. I was imagining show us proof of identity (with a large burden on the information supplier) rather than a cheap automated check. By cheap I also mean monetarily: it's probably not a good use of WMUK money verifying the addresses of non-voting members if WMUK is not legally obliged to. Harry (User:Jarry1250) ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org -- *Katherine Bavage * *Fundraising Manager * *Wikimedia UK* +44 20 7065 0949 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
On 20/11/12 11:42, Thomas Morton wrote: I suppose what we need to demonstrate is that, say 'Joe Bloggs' is a) Is who he says he is (proof of photo ID) and b) Lives at the address he says he does (utility bill? Electoral roll?). If people pay from a verified paypal account the need to check is superseded, because Paypal requires all this information. This is all a bit exclusive. Widening membership should not be down PayPal or electoral roll or having a bank account (since this would exclude people aged 17 years old and under). Finally, not sure whether we are strictly legally obliged or not is the point - even if we aren't, 'should we put some safeguard against entryism/vote fraud in place' is the premise on which I've been asked to raise the issue. Well, yes, but living in a world where many editors hide their identity Gordo ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
On 20 November 2012 12:30, Gordon Joly gordon.j...@pobox.com wrote: This is all a bit exclusive. Widening membership should not be down PayPal or electoral roll or having a bank account (since this would exclude people aged 17 years old and under). You can have a bank account when under 18. I think my bank let me get my own account (rather than my mum having an account in my name) when I was 13. Obviously, you can't get any kind of credit facility (which includes standard debit cards), but that's not an issue for us. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
Sorry to chime in from outside, but why is checking the address so important? How many people in the UK do not have some form of government ID (passport, drivers licence, etc., I know the UK is not big on ID cards)? By the way, Couchsurfing has a friendly way of verifying addresses: they send you a postcard (that can be recycled as stickers) with a unique code that you need to type in on the website. Best regards, Bence On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote: On 20 November 2012 12:30, Gordon Joly gordon.j...@pobox.com wrote: This is all a bit exclusive. Widening membership should not be down PayPal or electoral roll or having a bank account (since this would exclude people aged 17 years old and under). You can have a bank account when under 18. I think my bank let me get my own account (rather than my mum having an account in my name) when I was 13. Obviously, you can't get any kind of credit facility (which includes standard debit cards), but that's not an issue for us. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org -- Damokos Bence ügyvezető alelnök, Wikimédia Magyarország http://wikimedia.hu http://wiki.media.hu/ ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
On 20/11/12 12:35, Thomas Dalton wrote: On 20 November 2012 12:30, Gordon Joly gordon.j...@pobox.com wrote: This is all a bit exclusive. Widening membership should not be down PayPal or electoral roll or having a bank account (since this would exclude people aged 17 years old and under). You can have a bank account when under 18. I think my bank let me get my own account (rather than my mum having an account in my name) when I was 13. Obviously, you can't get any kind of credit facility (which includes standard debit cards), but that's not an issue for us. _ Aha. Seems there are accounts for the 11 to 15 age range (Barclays, Santander, etc) But I think membership should be open to all. id checks will exclude some. Gordo ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
On 20 November 2012 13:05, Gordon Joly gordon.j...@pobox.com wrote: Aha. Seems there are accounts for the 11 to 15 age range (Barclays, Santander, etc) But I think membership should be open to all. id checks will exclude some. As long as it is only a small number of members that can't be checked by whatever standard system we come up with, then they can be dealt with as special cases. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote: On 20 November 2012 10:37, Katherine Bavage katherine.bav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Morning - All members are voting members...unless I've missed something? I think Harry might have been distinguishing between members that do vote and members that don't, rather than members than *can* vote. Just like insurance companies only check your details when you try to make a claim, we could just check when people try to vote. Indeed, although I'm not sure exactly what percentage of members choose to vote, and hence the scale of the efficiency. Harry -- Harry Burt (User:Jarry1250) ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
We can easily come up with all sorts of ways to make membership a massive pain in the arse. But what was the threat model again? And what's accepted practice - how do other UK charities deal with said threat model? - d. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
Bottom line for me is what is not working at the moment that we need to change? Our hope is to greatly grow our membership. Obviously there are risks but are they really huge? The more members we have the less the risk of cabals taking over. On 20 November 2012 13:34, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: We can easily come up with all sorts of ways to make membership a massive pain in the arse. But what was the threat model again? And what's accepted practice - how do other UK charities deal with said threat model? - d. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org -- *Jon Davies - Chief Executive Wikimedia UK*. Mobile (0044) 7803 505 169 tweet @jonatreesdavies Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). Telephone (0044) 207 065 0990. Visit http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/ and @wikimediauk ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
On 20/11/12 13:34, David Gerard wrote: We can easily come up with all sorts of ways to make membership a massive pain in the arse. But what was the threat model again? And what's accepted practice - how do other UK charities deal with said threat model? Sounds like something for the Audit Committee. Gordo ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
Katharine has already explained the threat: somebody registers multiply under different identities, or banned people register under false identities, and then uses votes to push a motion at and AGM or EGM or to push candidates onto the board of trustees. We want people to become active members while keeping personal details private, and admit membership applications from people who are young, not on the electoral register etc.. We also want to run elections and votes in a way that are protected against this sort of threat, and to comply with the company law Katharine has cited. This is contradictory, so Wikimedia UK needs to decide what's more important, and if there are ways around like giving people a meaningful membership which isn't a membership in the terms of company law and so isn't subject to those regulations. On 20 November 2012 13:34, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: We can easily come up with all sorts of ways to make membership a massive pain in the arse. But what was the threat model again? And what's accepted practice - how do other UK charities deal with said threat model? - d. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org -- Dr Martin L Poulter Wikipedia contributor http://enwp.org/User:MartinPoulter Associate, Wikimedia UK http://uk.wikimedia.org/ Musician http://soundcloud.com/martin-poulter http://myspace.com/comapilot Person http://infobomb.org/ ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
On 20 November 2012 13:53, Martin Poulter infob...@gmail.com wrote: Katharine has already explained the threat: somebody registers multiply under different identities, or banned people register under false identities, and then uses votes to push a motion at and AGM or EGM or to push candidates onto the board of trustees. The case of such a thing that springs to mind is one you should certainly know: NIMH vs Scientology, in the sixties. The NIHM prevailed because the court ruled the board had, per the rules, the absolute right to exclude anyone they wanted for any reason or none. (That the attempt was clearly a takeover probably helped.) Has there been case law since? - d. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
To reply to Harry's points: (i) Should we enforce more checks on prospective members? Yes, although enforce is the wrong word. Perhaps check that they are real people who will support our objects and haven't given a fake address would be a better way of putting it. We have a duty to ensure that the members of the charity are actual people, and not, for example, someone's cats who have a vote in order to swing elections one way or another. (ii) Should we enforce more checks on members before we let them vote at AGMs, whether in person or by proxy? No. Once a member, it's too late - you have the right to vote (even if you're a cat, I suspect). Checks really need to be done before members are approved. Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* On 19 November 2012 15:19, Harry Burt harryab...@gmail.com wrote: Aren't there really two points here: (i) Should we enforce more checks on prospective members? (ii) Should we enforce more checks on members before we let them vote at AGMs, whether in person or by proxy? I think the legal question is a good one. Are charities required to do neither/either/both? Legal issues aside, surely (ii) but not (i) is the easiest by quite a margin. Harry -- Harry Burt (User:Jarry1250) On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Katherine Bavage katherine.bav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hi All, At the board meeting on Saturday a valid point was made that currently the verification process for membership applications doesn't really prove a barrier to fraudulent or duplicate applications. I'd like to look at ways of improving this, so as we aim to expand our membership numbers we're also making sure fairness is enshrined in a checking process that means people can only have one vote. If people pay their membership fee with Paypal, this isn't so much of a problem, as having a verified paypal account has already required this person to link their identity to their postal address - but we want to be as open as possible and so there will be people who give us 'a form and a fiver'. What checking processes do we think would be acceptable without being invasive/onerous? At a basic level, we should be confirming that the applicant is the named person at the address given. Please flag up concerns, suggestions for services or resources we can use, and so on. It may be that we can't completely eliminate the risk of fraudulent applications, but we can make it more difficult and provide a measure or reassurance that no individual has more power than any other by being able to vote twice etc . Thanks! -- *Katherine Bavage * *Fundraising Manager * *Wikimedia UK* +44 20 7065 0949 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
How about doing it in a nice way? Sending a thank you LETTER (sorry trees) with a badge or sticker in and an 'if not received return to...label. AT least that would be some sort of verification. Perhaps a freepost confirmation postcard therein as a belt and braces? To be frank going from 320 to 260 members recently seems that our problem is quite the reverse. On 20 November 2012 14:27, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: To reply to Harry's points: (i) Should we enforce more checks on prospective members? Yes, although enforce is the wrong word. Perhaps check that they are real people who will support our objects and haven't given a fake address would be a better way of putting it. We have a duty to ensure that the members of the charity are actual people, and not, for example, someone's cats who have a vote in order to swing elections one way or another. (ii) Should we enforce more checks on members before we let them vote at AGMs, whether in person or by proxy? No. Once a member, it's too late - you have the right to vote (even if you're a cat, I suspect). Checks really need to be done before members are approved. Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* On 19 November 2012 15:19, Harry Burt harryab...@gmail.com wrote: Aren't there really two points here: (i) Should we enforce more checks on prospective members? (ii) Should we enforce more checks on members before we let them vote at AGMs, whether in person or by proxy? I think the legal question is a good one. Are charities required to do neither/either/both? Legal issues aside, surely (ii) but not (i) is the easiest by quite a margin. Harry -- Harry Burt (User:Jarry1250) On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Katherine Bavage katherine.bav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hi All, At the board meeting on Saturday a valid point was made that currently the verification process for membership applications doesn't really prove a barrier to fraudulent or duplicate applications. I'd like to look at ways of improving this, so as we aim to expand our membership numbers we're also making sure fairness is enshrined in a checking process that means people can only have one vote. If people pay their membership fee with Paypal, this isn't so much of a problem, as having a verified paypal account has already required this person to link their identity to their postal address - but we want to be as open as possible and so there will be people who give us 'a form and a fiver'. What checking processes do we think would be acceptable without being invasive/onerous? At a basic level, we should be confirming that the applicant is the named person at the address given. Please flag up concerns, suggestions for services or resources we can use, and so on. It may be that we can't completely eliminate the risk of fraudulent applications, but we can make it more difficult and provide a measure or reassurance that no individual has more power than any other by being able to vote twice etc . Thanks! -- *Katherine Bavage * *Fundraising Manager * *Wikimedia UK* +44 20 7065 0949 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org -- *Jon Davies - Chief Executive Wikimedia UK*. Mobile (0044) 7803 505 169 tweet @jonatreesdavies Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
On 20 November 2012 15:03, Jon Davies jon.dav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: How about doing it in a nice way? Sending a thank you LETTER (sorry trees) with a badge or sticker in and an 'if not received return to...label. AT least that would be some sort of verification. Perhaps a freepost confirmation postcard therein as a belt and braces? That's easy and sensible. To be frank going from 320 to 260 members recently seems that our problem is quite the reverse. Well, yes. But with a suitable screening process I'm sure we can reduce that number even further. - d. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
On Nov 20, 2012 12:58 PM, Damokos Bence damokos.be...@wikimedia.hu wrote: Sorry to chime in from outside, but why is checking the address so important? How many people in the UK do not have some form of government ID (passport, drivers licence, etc., I know the UK is not big on ID cards)? That's an impressive understatement! ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
Just in case anyone's wondering - the Board didn't discuss this issue at much length at the weekend, but the issue is certainly one to think about, and we asked Katherine to look into the subject. I haven't yet mentioned my personal views based on my own experience. so here they are; Personally I think the most sensible safeguards against 'entryism' is having a large and well-involved membership. Another step some organisations take is to say that someone has to be a member for a certain length of time before conferring voting rights on them, though the only time I've seen this is enacted is when there have been serious problems with people joining to push particular agendas. (Also worth nothing that this in our case would need an amendment to the Articles.) I'd also note that I've worked for several membership organisations and am a member of many more - none that I know of take any steps to verify memberships, even where someone is formally required to approve each member before admitting them. (And under what circumstances would we refuse membership? Not being on the electoral role doesn't mean someone doesn't exist...) If we did do anything like this we would have to carefully consider whether the benefit in terms of preventing a potential, if somewhat hypothetical, democratic problem was actually bigger than any likely cost in terms of making it more difficult to join. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
On 20 November 2012 20:12, Chris Keating chriskeatingw...@gmail.com wrote: I'd also note that I've worked for several membership organisations and am a member of many more - none that I know of take any steps to verify memberships, even where someone is formally required to approve each member before admitting them. (And under what circumstances would we refuse membership? Not being on the electoral role doesn't mean someone doesn't exist...) Well, yes. Standard practice is actually not bothering. If we did do anything like this we would have to carefully consider whether the benefit in terms of preventing a potential, if somewhat hypothetical, democratic problem was actually bigger than any likely cost in terms of making it more difficult to join. To be fair, it is literally true that we have seriously dedicated gibbering nutters who are out to fuck us up any way they possibly can; much more so than the run-of-the-mill small charity our size. But you're right that the very first thing to try is a larger, broader and more involved membership. - d. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
On 19/11/12 10:54, Katherine Bavage wrote: At the board meeting on Saturday a valid point was made that currently the verification process for membership applications doesn't really prove a barrier to fraudulent or duplicate applications. fraudulent or duplicate applications. Isn't that illegal? That is join a body twice or more, or be ineligible? Gordo ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
I don't know, but I'm guessing by definition that people who are trying to commit fraud might not be put off by that, plus if we don't have effective checking mechanisms we're not going to be able to know and pursue action even if so. Still, any legal types on the list who can answer the question? Kat On 19 November 2012 13:27, Gordon Joly gordon.j...@pobox.com wrote: On 19/11/12 10:54, Katherine Bavage wrote: At the board meeting on Saturday a valid point was made that currently the verification process for membership applications doesn't really prove a barrier to fraudulent or duplicate applications. fraudulent or duplicate applications. Isn't that illegal? That is join a body twice or more, or be ineligible? Gordo __**_ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-lhttp://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org -- *Katherine Bavage * *Fundraising Manager * *Wikimedia UK* +44 20 7065 0949 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
Aren't there really two points here: (i) Should we enforce more checks on prospective members? (ii) Should we enforce more checks on members before we let them vote at AGMs, whether in person or by proxy? I think the legal question is a good one. Are charities required to do neither/either/both? Legal issues aside, surely (ii) but not (i) is the easiest by quite a margin. Harry -- Harry Burt (User:Jarry1250) On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Katherine Bavage katherine.bav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hi All, At the board meeting on Saturday a valid point was made that currently the verification process for membership applications doesn't really prove a barrier to fraudulent or duplicate applications. I'd like to look at ways of improving this, so as we aim to expand our membership numbers we're also making sure fairness is enshrined in a checking process that means people can only have one vote. If people pay their membership fee with Paypal, this isn't so much of a problem, as having a verified paypal account has already required this person to link their identity to their postal address - but we want to be as open as possible and so there will be people who give us 'a form and a fiver'. What checking processes do we think would be acceptable without being invasive/onerous? At a basic level, we should be confirming that the applicant is the named person at the address given. Please flag up concerns, suggestions for services or resources we can use, and so on. It may be that we can't completely eliminate the risk of fraudulent applications, but we can make it more difficult and provide a measure or reassurance that no individual has more power than any other by being able to vote twice etc . Thanks! -- *Katherine Bavage * *Fundraising Manager * *Wikimedia UK* +44 20 7065 0949 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
Hey Harry, I'm not sure if ii) *is* easier. Compare the work of verifying members before every AGM and EGM or merely at the point of joining. We don't really have formal check on membership at the moment - no applicant is asked to prove their residency at their address of that they have provided their real name. In terms of Wikimedia U.K. as a company it is required to keep an accurate list of members addresses and names ( http://www.companylawsolutions.co.uk/topics/statutory_registers.shtml#Ins) (apologies if you knew that already) I don't think it's *required* to check validity of address. While, the legal view (on whether in creating a false membership invalidates any voting rights) will be informative, I'm still not seeing how that is material unless we have a mechanism for ID'ing false applications. Therefore, I still think the key question is one of 'How should we check those members' names and addresses are valid' in a way that isn't too invasive, expensive or time consuming. No suggestions yet... Kat On 19 November 2012 15:19, Harry Burt harryab...@gmail.com wrote: Aren't there really two points here: (i) Should we enforce more checks on prospective members? (ii) Should we enforce more checks on members before we let them vote at AGMs, whether in person or by proxy? I think the legal question is a good one. Are charities required to do neither/either/both? Legal issues aside, surely (ii) but not (i) is the easiest by quite a margin. Harry -- Harry Burt (User:Jarry1250) On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Katherine Bavage katherine.bav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hi All, At the board meeting on Saturday a valid point was made that currently the verification process for membership applications doesn't really prove a barrier to fraudulent or duplicate applications. I'd like to look at ways of improving this, so as we aim to expand our membership numbers we're also making sure fairness is enshrined in a checking process that means people can only have one vote. If people pay their membership fee with Paypal, this isn't so much of a problem, as having a verified paypal account has already required this person to link their identity to their postal address - but we want to be as open as possible and so there will be people who give us 'a form and a fiver'. What checking processes do we think would be acceptable without being invasive/onerous? At a basic level, we should be confirming that the applicant is the named person at the address given. Please flag up concerns, suggestions for services or resources we can use, and so on. It may be that we can't completely eliminate the risk of fraudulent applications, but we can make it more difficult and provide a measure or reassurance that no individual has more power than any other by being able to vote twice etc . Thanks! -- *Katherine Bavage * *Fundraising Manager * *Wikimedia UK* +44 20 7065 0949 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org -- *Katherine Bavage * *Fundraising Manager * *Wikimedia UK* +44 20 7065 0949 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
The only way I can think of for verifying identities like this is a credit check. For example, this service offered by Experian: http://www.experian.co.uk/qas/qas-authenticate.html I'm not sure what that would cost or what data protection restrictions there are on its use. On Nov 19, 2012 4:32 PM, Katherine Bavage katherine.bav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hey Harry, I'm not sure if ii) *is* easier. Compare the work of verifying members before every AGM and EGM or merely at the point of joining. We don't really have formal check on membership at the moment - no applicant is asked to prove their residency at their address of that they have provided their real name. In terms of Wikimedia U.K. as a company it is required to keep an accurate list of members addresses and names ( http://www.companylawsolutions.co.uk/topics/statutory_registers.shtml#Ins) (apologies if you knew that already) I don't think it's *required* to check validity of address. While, the legal view (on whether in creating a false membership invalidates any voting rights) will be informative, I'm still not seeing how that is material unless we have a mechanism for ID'ing false applications. Therefore, I still think the key question is one of 'How should we check those members' names and addresses are valid' in a way that isn't too invasive, expensive or time consuming. No suggestions yet... Kat On 19 November 2012 15:19, Harry Burt harryab...@gmail.com wrote: Aren't there really two points here: (i) Should we enforce more checks on prospective members? (ii) Should we enforce more checks on members before we let them vote at AGMs, whether in person or by proxy? I think the legal question is a good one. Are charities required to do neither/either/both? Legal issues aside, surely (ii) but not (i) is the easiest by quite a margin. Harry -- Harry Burt (User:Jarry1250) On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Katherine Bavage katherine.bav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hi All, At the board meeting on Saturday a valid point was made that currently the verification process for membership applications doesn't really prove a barrier to fraudulent or duplicate applications. I'd like to look at ways of improving this, so as we aim to expand our membership numbers we're also making sure fairness is enshrined in a checking process that means people can only have one vote. If people pay their membership fee with Paypal, this isn't so much of a problem, as having a verified paypal account has already required this person to link their identity to their postal address - but we want to be as open as possible and so there will be people who give us 'a form and a fiver'. What checking processes do we think would be acceptable without being invasive/onerous? At a basic level, we should be confirming that the applicant is the named person at the address given. Please flag up concerns, suggestions for services or resources we can use, and so on. It may be that we can't completely eliminate the risk of fraudulent applications, but we can make it more difficult and provide a measure or reassurance that no individual has more power than any other by being able to vote twice etc . Thanks! -- *Katherine Bavage * *Fundraising Manager * *Wikimedia UK* +44 20 7065 0949 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org -- *Katherine Bavage * *Fundraising Manager * *Wikimedia UK* +44 20 7065 0949 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Verifying membership applications - Suggestions and comments
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Katherine Bavage katherine.bav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hey Harry, I'm not sure if ii) *is* easier. Compare the work of verifying members before every AGM and EGM or merely at the point of joining. We don't really have formal check on membership at the moment - no applicant is asked to prove their residency at their address of that they have provided their real name. It depends, I suppose, on what kind of check you have in mind. I was imagining show us proof of identity (with a large burden on the information supplier) rather than a cheap automated check. By cheap I also mean monetarily: it's probably not a good use of WMUK money verifying the addresses of non-voting members if WMUK is not legally obliged to. Harry (User:Jarry1250) ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
