Re: [Wikimedia-l] YouTube shooting and risk assessment

2018-04-05 Thread Gnangarra
en:wp has a very good concept
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Don%27t_stuff_beans_up_your_nose

>


> ​" In our zeal to head off others' unwise action, we may put forth ideas
> they have not entertained before. It may be wise not to caution against
> such possibilities
> 
> . Prophylactic  admonition
> may trigger novel mischief. As the popular saying goes, "don't give 'em any
> ideas". In other words, "​
>

On 6 April 2018 at 10:34, Philippe Beaudette  wrote:

> I can not speak to current practice at the WMF, but I can speak to
> practice when I was there (ancient history, long ago, I know) when I say
> that this is something that was carefully considered and there were
> appropriate experts consulted at the time.  Knowing the team there like i
> do, I'm confident that those plans have not lapsed, and that they continue
> to give appropriate (though not paranoiac) consideration to the realities
> of the world.
>
> I also know that when I was there, we would have considered it
> inappropriate to share detail about those plans publicly, and I continue to
> believe that is good practice.
>
> Philippe
>
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 5:19 PM, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
>> Safety of attendees has for a long time been a criteria ... agree, but
>> the risk assesement we are discussing here is not about safety, but
>> security. I am sure we might not use them all properly, I am also not a
>> native English speaker, but they are not the same concept, right?
>>
>> Now, there were examples where looking at a dossier where the information
>> was about only the first one... that's the point here. I am talking about
>> events, the first email was about the place of the office... but the
>> motivation of a criminal act in both case can be overlapping, so they are
>> an unicum in a proper evaluation, IMHO. I am not expert in the field, but
>> if you start to assess the risk of someone harming you in SFO, that could
>> happen also in another place where many of the same people gather annually,
>> and that you also inform millions of people with sitenotices about it.
>>
>> Now, I don't say that you must inform a lot. But if you are not the
>> police you are also not the fire brigade, but you wouldn't write in a
>> candidature nothing or simply "if there is a fire someone is paid to
>> extinguish it"... you would make more effort, and we do. If you don't want
>> to add another paragraph in the final document, rename it "safety and
>> security" but start to think organically about it.
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>
>>
>> Il Venerdì 6 Aprile 2018 1:59, Gnangarra  ha
>> scritto:
>>
>>
>>  Safety of attendees has for a long time been a criteria that needs to be
>> addressed when bidding for any WMF event, the people bidding are the better
>> placed to assess the reality of the local situation.  Open bidding
>> processes enable others to also critically look at the options,  ultimately
>> we are more at risk at home where feel comfortable then when travelling.
>>  Every location has its risks, its undesirables, and crime, just getting a
>> taxi to and from the airport is a risk reality is its also more likely than
>> a terrorist event
>> On 6 April 2018 at 03:24, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
>> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>>
>> That's why people offwiki say they don't discuss this thing on meta or
>> here, because you always have an "answer" like this... this sarcasm. in
>> it's way, an example of an unhealthy community.
>>
>>  Look at what I wrote:
>>
>> "Even if it is not nice to think about it, and of course you try to do it
>> mostly in private, you should clearly write down at least at a certain
>> point that you are preparing to all scenario, contacting the police and so
>> on. it should be a paragraph in a candidature for an event, IMHO. but it
>> should be done."
>> that's it. it's not complicated... I know because of partially direct
>> experience... it's part of the world, when you are professional. You can't
>> prepare an event of certain scale and in a certain areas and ignore it in
>> the final dossier. There will be someone who take a look at that. So, who
>> talked about "solving terrorism"? just the one who wanted to make a joke.
>>
>> Maybe people are not big babies and even without constant reminder they
>> don't exaggerate. You have no idea with whom I discuss this aspect so far,
>> what such wikimedians do in their real life.  They are able to focus on the
>> point... the point is security and if you replied this way to this question
>> in many situations, you will be considered unprepared.
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>
>> Il Giovedì 5 Aprile 2018 20:29, Alphos OGame 
>> ha scritto:
>>
>>
>>  I heartily agree : build that firewall, and let 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] YouTube shooting and risk assessment

2018-04-05 Thread Philippe Beaudette
I can not speak to current practice at the WMF, but I can speak to practice
when I was there (ancient history, long ago, I know) when I say that this
is something that was carefully considered and there were appropriate
experts consulted at the time.  Knowing the team there like i do, I'm
confident that those plans have not lapsed, and that they continue to give
appropriate (though not paranoiac) consideration to the realities of the
world.

I also know that when I was there, we would have considered it
inappropriate to share detail about those plans publicly, and I continue to
believe that is good practice.

Philippe

On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 5:19 PM, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Safety of attendees has for a long time been a criteria ... agree, but the
> risk assesement we are discussing here is not about safety, but security. I
> am sure we might not use them all properly, I am also not a native English
> speaker, but they are not the same concept, right?
>
> Now, there were examples where looking at a dossier where the information
> was about only the first one... that's the point here. I am talking about
> events, the first email was about the place of the office... but the
> motivation of a criminal act in both case can be overlapping, so they are
> an unicum in a proper evaluation, IMHO. I am not expert in the field, but
> if you start to assess the risk of someone harming you in SFO, that could
> happen also in another place where many of the same people gather annually,
> and that you also inform millions of people with sitenotices about it.
>
> Now, I don't say that you must inform a lot. But if you are not the police
> you are also not the fire brigade, but you wouldn't write in a candidature
> nothing or simply "if there is a fire someone is paid to extinguish it"...
> you would make more effort, and we do. If you don't want to add another
> paragraph in the final document, rename it "safety and security" but start
> to think organically about it.
>
> Alex
>
>
>
> Il Venerdì 6 Aprile 2018 1:59, Gnangarra  ha
> scritto:
>
>
>  Safety of attendees has for a long time been a criteria that needs to be
> addressed when bidding for any WMF event, the people bidding are the better
> placed to assess the reality of the local situation.  Open bidding
> processes enable others to also critically look at the options,  ultimately
> we are more at risk at home where feel comfortable then when travelling.
>  Every location has its risks, its undesirables, and crime, just getting a
> taxi to and from the airport is a risk reality is its also more likely than
> a terrorist event
> On 6 April 2018 at 03:24, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> That's why people offwiki say they don't discuss this thing on meta or
> here, because you always have an "answer" like this... this sarcasm. in
> it's way, an example of an unhealthy community.
>
>  Look at what I wrote:
>
> "Even if it is not nice to think about it, and of course you try to do it
> mostly in private, you should clearly write down at least at a certain
> point that you are preparing to all scenario, contacting the police and so
> on. it should be a paragraph in a candidature for an event, IMHO. but it
> should be done."
> that's it. it's not complicated... I know because of partially direct
> experience... it's part of the world, when you are professional. You can't
> prepare an event of certain scale and in a certain areas and ignore it in
> the final dossier. There will be someone who take a look at that. So, who
> talked about "solving terrorism"? just the one who wanted to make a joke.
>
> Maybe people are not big babies and even without constant reminder they
> don't exaggerate. You have no idea with whom I discuss this aspect so far,
> what such wikimedians do in their real life.  They are able to focus on the
> point... the point is security and if you replied this way to this question
> in many situations, you will be considered unprepared.
>
> Alex
>
>
> Il Giovedì 5 Aprile 2018 20:29, Alphos OGame 
> ha scritto:
>
>
>  I heartily agree : build that firewall, and let Cisco pay for it !
> Wait, what were you suggesting in your incipit ? Oh, right, "a way that's
> rational, avoiding to create unnecessary panic of course".
> I'd rather not ask of people organizing conventions (which is already
> time-consuming by itself) that they solve terrorism in their town, which is
> what the police are probably more suited for, if you don't mind ; as a
> matter of fact, it is not one of their duties as convention holders, plain
> and simple, and neither are they doctors, police officers, judges, jesters,
> masseuses, nannies, yoga instructors, cooks, indentured servants, etc
> (except of course if they are, which may happen).
>
> So let's please not overreact, and stick to the current discussion instead
> of 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcing the Wikimedia Technical Conference

2018-04-05 Thread Pine W
Hi Victoria,

Thank you very much for the explanations.

I am glad to hear that the net effect of these changes will be that travel
costs remain flat. Does that include lodging and per diem costs?

I would suggest collaborating with the WikiConference North America
organizers to try to arrange for there to be no overlap between the two
conferences. That may be impossible, but I think that it is desirable. To
the best of my knowledge, the exact WMCONNA dates have been finalized

while the WMTCON dates have not
. Both
conferences could be in October but on different weekends so that there
would be no overlap.

The WMF Board has not yet adopted the 2018-2019 WMF Annual Plan, which I
believe means that the plans for the WMTCON and for the next WMF All Hands
Conference are contingent on WMF Board approval of that annual plan. Is
that correct?

I would like there to be a policy that every conference which receives WMF
funding, including the Wikimedia Conference and All Hands, should go
through a WMF Conference and Event Grants process
, perhaps with levels of
detail and scrutiny that are scaled according to the sizes of budgets and
the number of anticipated participants. Even if funding is a foregone
conclusion, I think that compelling all conference organizers to do this
will help with transparency and to strengthen the planning and evaluation
of conferences.

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
___
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] YouTube shooting and risk assessment

2018-04-05 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
Safety of attendees has for a long time been a criteria ... agree, but the risk 
assesement we are discussing here is not about safety, but security. I am sure 
we might not use them all properly, I am also not a native English speaker, but 
they are not the same concept, right?

Now, there were examples where looking at a dossier where the information was 
about only the first one... that's the point here. I am talking about events, 
the first email was about the place of the office... but the motivation of a 
criminal act in both case can be overlapping, so they are an unicum in a proper 
evaluation, IMHO. I am not expert in the field, but if you start to assess the 
risk of someone harming you in SFO, that could happen also in another place 
where many of the same people gather annually, and that you also inform 
millions of people with sitenotices about it.

Now, I don't say that you must inform a lot. But if you are not the police you 
are also not the fire brigade, but you wouldn't write in a candidature nothing 
or simply "if there is a fire someone is paid to extinguish it"... you would 
make more effort, and we do. If you don't want to add another paragraph in the 
final document, rename it "safety and security" but start to think organically 
about it. 

Alex

 

Il Venerdì 6 Aprile 2018 1:59, Gnangarra  ha scritto:
 

 Safety of attendees has for a long time been a criteria that needs to be 
addressed when bidding for any WMF event, the people bidding are the better 
placed to assess the reality of the local situation.  Open bidding processes 
enable others to also critically look at the options,  ultimately we are more 
at risk at home where feel comfortable then when travelling.   Every location 
has its risks, its undesirables, and crime, just getting a taxi to and from the 
airport is a risk reality is its also more likely than a terrorist event
On 6 April 2018 at 03:24, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l 
 wrote:

That's why people offwiki say they don't discuss this thing on meta or here, 
because you always have an "answer" like this... this sarcasm. in it's way, an 
example of an unhealthy community.
 
 Look at what I wrote:

"Even if it is not nice to think about it, and of course you try to do it 
mostly in private, you should clearly write down at least at a certain point 
that you are preparing to all scenario, contacting the police and so on. it 
should be a paragraph in a candidature for an event, IMHO. but it should be 
done."
that's it. it's not complicated... I know because of partially direct 
experience... it's part of the world, when you are professional. You can't 
prepare an event of certain scale and in a certain areas and ignore it in the 
final dossier. There will be someone who take a look at that. So, who talked 
about "solving terrorism"? just the one who wanted to make a joke.

Maybe people are not big babies and even without constant reminder they don't 
exaggerate. You have no idea with whom I discuss this aspect so far, what such 
wikimedians do in their real life.  They are able to focus on the point... the 
point is security and if you replied this way to this question in many 
situations, you will be considered unprepared.

Alex


    Il Giovedì 5 Aprile 2018 20:29, Alphos OGame  ha 
scritto:


 I heartily agree : build that firewall, and let Cisco pay for it !
Wait, what were you suggesting in your incipit ? Oh, right, "a way that's 
rational, avoiding to create unnecessary panic of course".
I'd rather not ask of people organizing conventions (which is already 
time-consuming by itself) that they solve terrorism in their town, which is 
what the police are probably more suited for, if you don't mind ; as a matter 
of fact, it is not one of their duties as convention holders, plain and simple, 
and neither are they doctors, police officers, judges, jesters, masseuses, 
nannies, yoga instructors, cooks, indentured servants, etc (except of course if 
they are, which may happen).

So let's please not overreact, and stick to the current discussion instead of 
having the next WikiConvention in a flying fortress with armed guards, sniffing 
dogs, and metal detectors at every door…

Roger / Alphos



2018-04-05 18:40 GMT+02:00 Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l 
:

I remember we discussed 2 or 3 years about this scenario with some wikimedians 
off wiki. I strongly support to discuss at least once openly about that. In a 
way that it's rational, avoiding to create unnecessary panic... of course.


Despite the claimed neutrality of the communities, reality always bites. Now, a 
terrorist can imagine that we will not put a black banner if someone kill a lot 
of people somewhere... but if same amount of wikimedians are killed at a 
international rally the probability that a block ribbon, an editnotice with a 
statement appear on many language edition is 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] YouTube shooting and risk assessment

2018-04-05 Thread Gnangarra
Safety of attendees has for a long time been a criteria that needs to be
addressed when bidding for any WMF event, the people bidding are the better
placed to assess the reality of the local situation.  Open bidding
processes enable others to also critically look at the options,  ultimately
we are more at risk at home where feel comfortable then when travelling.
 Every location has its risks, its undesirables, and crime, just getting a
taxi to and from the airport is a risk reality is its also more likely than
a terrorist event

On 6 April 2018 at 03:24, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:

> That's why people offwiki say they don't discuss this thing on meta or
> here, because you always have an "answer" like this... this sarcasm. in
> it's way, an example of an unhealthy community.
>
>  Look at what I wrote:
>
> "Even if it is not nice to think about it, and of course you try to do it
> mostly in private, you should clearly write down at least at a certain
> point that you are preparing to all scenario, contacting the police and so
> on. it should be a paragraph in a candidature for an event, IMHO. but it
> should be done."
> that's it. it's not complicated... I know because of partially direct
> experience... it's part of the world, when you are professional. You can't
> prepare an event of certain scale and in a certain areas and ignore it in
> the final dossier. There will be someone who take a look at that. So, who
> talked about "solving terrorism"? just the one who wanted to make a joke.
>
> Maybe people are not big babies and even without constant reminder they
> don't exaggerate. You have no idea with whom I discuss this aspect so far,
> what such wikimedians do in their real life.  They are able to focus on the
> point... the point is security and if you replied this way to this question
> in many situations, you will be considered unprepared.
>
> Alex
>
>
> Il Giovedì 5 Aprile 2018 20:29, Alphos OGame 
> ha scritto:
>
>
>  I heartily agree : build that firewall, and let Cisco pay for it !
> Wait, what were you suggesting in your incipit ? Oh, right, "a way that's
> rational, avoiding to create unnecessary panic of course".
> I'd rather not ask of people organizing conventions (which is already
> time-consuming by itself) that they solve terrorism in their town, which is
> what the police are probably more suited for, if you don't mind ; as a
> matter of fact, it is not one of their duties as convention holders, plain
> and simple, and neither are they doctors, police officers, judges, jesters,
> masseuses, nannies, yoga instructors, cooks, indentured servants, etc
> (except of course if they are, which may happen).
>
> So let's please not overreact, and stick to the current discussion instead
> of having the next WikiConvention in a flying fortress with armed guards,
> sniffing dogs, and metal detectors at every door…
>
> Roger / Alphos
>
>
>
> 2018-04-05 18:40 GMT+02:00 Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>:
>
> I remember we discussed 2 or 3 years about this scenario with some
> wikimedians off wiki. I strongly support to discuss at least once openly
> about that. In a way that it's rational, avoiding to create unnecessary
> panic... of course.
>
>
> Despite the claimed neutrality of the communities, reality always bites.
> Now, a terrorist can imagine that we will not put a black banner if someone
> kill a lot of people somewhere... but if same amount of wikimedians are
> killed at a international rally the probability that a block ribbon, an
> editnotice with a statement appear on many language edition is higher. it's
> an attack at the community like it is a proposal of a law somewhere, and we
> naturally react stronger.
>
>
> It would be a bigger impact, if you think about it. You can get the
> attention of billions of people every time they connect to the 5th or 6th
> largest website in the world. Cynically speaking, if you also consider the
> facts that it's about free knowledge and volunteers, than a mass murder at
> at a wikimedian event might be more "effective" than at a discotheque or
> the seat of a multinational conglomerate.
>
>
> If i remember correctly. in the months before a certain wiki-event, many
> people linked to radical activities were arrested in the area, in the same
> country. So, when you organize an event, it's not just about safety but
> also security. Even if it is not nice to think about it, and of course you
> try to do it mostly in private, you should clearly write down at least at a
> certain point that you are preparing to all scenario, contacting the police
> and so on. it should be a paragraph in a candidature for an event, IMHO.
> but it should be done.
>
> A.M.
>
> Il Giovedì 5 Aprile 2018 18:09, Vi to  ha
> scritto:
>
>
>  I read/receive related craps
>  

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Seeking your feedback on future Wikimedia Foundation metrics and activities meetings

2018-04-05 Thread Gregory Varnum
Greetings,

A reminder that we are accepting your suggestions on topics and highlights
for future Wikimedia Foundation metrics and activities meetings!


You are invited to share your ideas on presentations we should seek out or
a presentation you would like to make available. You can also share ideas
or information on activities to include during the monthly highlights.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_metrics_and_activities_meetings/Future_meetings


We are also continuing to take feedback via email and on-wiki regarding the
future plans for this meeting, which plans on sharing in a few months our
findings and planned changes.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_metrics_and_activities_meetings/Request_for_comments_-_2018


Thank you!
-greg

On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 3:49 PM, Gregory Varnum 
wrote:

> Greetings!
>
> At last month's metrics and activities meeting, the Wikimedia Foundation
> Communications department gave an update on the logistics of the actual
> meeting itself and put out a call for your feedback.[1] The department has
> been working over the past year to help determine what the next evolution
> of the meeting should be, and have taken steps to expand the meeting for an
> audience beyond just people within the Foundation.
>
> Thank you to everyone that has already emailed us with feedback! We will
> continue to collect feedback over the coming months, and we have also
> posted a Meta-Wiki page to collect feedback if you would prefer to post it
> on-wiki.[2]
>
> Based on the feedback we have already received, we have added some
> additional pages on Meta-Wiki to help with communications around the
> meeting:
> 1. A page that outlines the basic process the Communications department
> follows in planning the meeting.[3]
> 2. A page for you to request or suggest future meeting topics.[4]
>
> The most common question I receive about this meeting is from people
> interested in presenting, or with a suggestion for a highlight to mention.
> So, I want to point out that the new future meetings page is now our
> preferred location for making those suggestions and requests.[4] Keeping
> them in that central on-wiki location will help us with tracking requests
> and long-term planning.
>
> Again, we appreciate all of the feedback, and hope that you will join us
> for future meetings (or check out past recordings) as we continue to
> experiment and make adjustments.
>
> -greg
>
>
> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> metrics_and_activities_meetings/2018-02
>
> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> metrics_and_activities_meetings/Request_for_comments_-_2018
>
> [3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> metrics_and_activities_meetings/Process
>
> [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> metrics_and_activities_meetings/Future_meetings
>
> --
> Gregory Varnum
> Communications Strategist
> Wikimedia Foundation 
> gvar...@wikimedia.org
> Pronouns: He/His/Him
>



-- 
Gregory Varnum
Communications Strategist
Wikimedia Foundation 
gvar...@wikimedia.org
Pronouns: He/His/Him
___
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] YouTube shooting and risk assessment

2018-04-05 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
That's why people offwiki say they don't discuss this thing on meta or here, 
because you always have an "answer" like this... this sarcasm. in it's way, an 
example of an unhealthy community.
 
 Look at what I wrote:

"Even if it is not nice to think about it, and of course you try to do it 
mostly in private, you should clearly write down at least at a certain point 
that you are preparing to all scenario, contacting the police and so on. it 
should be a paragraph in a candidature for an event, IMHO. but it should be 
done."
that's it. it's not complicated... I know because of partially direct 
experience... it's part of the world, when you are professional. You can't 
prepare an event of certain scale and in a certain areas and ignore it in the 
final dossier. There will be someone who take a look at that. So, who talked 
about "solving terrorism"? just the one who wanted to make a joke. 

Maybe people are not big babies and even without constant reminder they don't 
exaggerate. You have no idea with whom I discuss this aspect so far, what such 
wikimedians do in their real life.  They are able to focus on the point... the 
point is security and if you replied this way to this question in many 
situations, you will be considered unprepared.

Alex


Il Giovedì 5 Aprile 2018 20:29, Alphos OGame  ha 
scritto:
 

 I heartily agree : build that firewall, and let Cisco pay for it !
Wait, what were you suggesting in your incipit ? Oh, right, "a way that's 
rational, avoiding to create unnecessary panic of course".
I'd rather not ask of people organizing conventions (which is already 
time-consuming by itself) that they solve terrorism in their town, which is 
what the police are probably more suited for, if you don't mind ; as a matter 
of fact, it is not one of their duties as convention holders, plain and simple, 
and neither are they doctors, police officers, judges, jesters, masseuses, 
nannies, yoga instructors, cooks, indentured servants, etc (except of course if 
they are, which may happen).

So let's please not overreact, and stick to the current discussion instead of 
having the next WikiConvention in a flying fortress with armed guards, sniffing 
dogs, and metal detectors at every door…

Roger / Alphos



2018-04-05 18:40 GMT+02:00 Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l 
:

I remember we discussed 2 or 3 years about this scenario with some wikimedians 
off wiki. I strongly support to discuss at least once openly about that. In a 
way that it's rational, avoiding to create unnecessary panic... of course.


Despite the claimed neutrality of the communities, reality always bites. Now, a 
terrorist can imagine that we will not put a black banner if someone kill a lot 
of people somewhere... but if same amount of wikimedians are killed at a 
international rally the probability that a block ribbon, an editnotice with a 
statement appear on many language edition is higher. it's an attack at the 
community like it is a proposal of a law somewhere, and we naturally react 
stronger.


It would be a bigger impact, if you think about it. You can get the attention 
of billions of people every time they connect to the 5th or 6th largest website 
in the world. Cynically speaking, if you also consider the facts that it's 
about free knowledge and volunteers, than a mass murder at at a wikimedian 
event might be more "effective" than at a discotheque or the seat of a 
multinational conglomerate.


If i remember correctly. in the months before a certain wiki-event, many people 
linked to radical activities were arrested in the area, in the same country. 
So, when you organize an event, it's not just about safety but also security. 
Even if it is not nice to think about it, and of course you try to do it mostly 
in private, you should clearly write down at least at a certain point that you 
are preparing to all scenario, contacting the police and so on. it should be a 
paragraph in a candidature for an event, IMHO. but it should be done.

A.M.

    Il Giovedì 5 Aprile 2018 18:09, Vi to  ha scritto:


 I read/receive related craps

on
a daily basis but it's hard to tell an idiot from a psychopath, so it may
become a risk for WMF offices.

Vito

2018-04-05 17:33 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett :

> I'm sure most of you will be aware of the unfortunate events at
> YouTube's HQ a couple fo days ago:
>
>    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ YouTube_headquarters_shooting
>
> Without giving away anything that might reveal vulnerabilities, does
> the WMF have contingency plans for such an incident? What about at
> community events in the US, and elsewhere?
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> __ _
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] YouTube shooting and risk assessment

2018-04-05 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
I remember we discussed 2 or 3 years about this scenario with some wikimedians 
off wiki. I strongly support to discuss at least once openly about that. In a 
way that it's rational, avoiding to create unnecessary panic... of course. 


Despite the claimed neutrality of the communities, reality always bites. Now, a 
terrorist can imagine that we will not put a black banner if someone kill a lot 
of people somewhere... but if same amount of wikimedians are killed at a 
international rally the probability that a block ribbon, an editnotice with a 
statement appear on many language edition is higher. it's an attack at the 
community like it is a proposal of a law somewhere, and we naturally react 
stronger.


It would be a bigger impact, if you think about it. You can get the attention 
of billions of people every time they connect to the 5th or 6th largest website 
in the world. Cynically speaking, if you also consider the facts that it's 
about free knowledge and volunteers, than a mass murder at at a wikimedian 
event might be more "effective" than at a discotheque or the seat of a 
multinational conglomerate.


If i remember correctly. in the months before a certain wiki-event, many people 
linked to radical activities were arrested in the area, in the same country. 
So, when you organize an event, it's not just about safety but also security. 
Even if it is not nice to think about it, and of course you try to do it mostly 
in private, you should clearly write down at least at a certain point that you 
are preparing to all scenario, contacting the police and so on. it should be a 
paragraph in a candidature for an event, IMHO. but it should be done.

A.M. 

Il Giovedì 5 Aprile 2018 18:09, Vi to  ha scritto:
 

 I read/receive related craps

on
a daily basis but it's hard to tell an idiot from a psychopath, so it may
become a risk for WMF offices.

Vito

2018-04-05 17:33 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett :

> I'm sure most of you will be aware of the unfortunate events at
> YouTube's HQ a couple fo days ago:
>
>    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube_headquarters_shooting
>
> Without giving away anything that might reveal vulnerabilities, does
> the WMF have contingency plans for such an incident? What about at
> community events in the US, and elsewhere?
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> 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] YouTube shooting and risk assessment

2018-04-05 Thread Vi to
I read/receive related craps

on
a daily basis but it's hard to tell an idiot from a psychopath, so it may
become a risk for WMF offices.

Vito

2018-04-05 17:33 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett :

> I'm sure most of you will be aware of the unfortunate events at
> YouTube's HQ a couple fo days ago:
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube_headquarters_shooting
>
> Without giving away anything that might reveal vulnerabilities, does
> the WMF have contingency plans for such an incident? What about at
> community events in the US, and elsewhere?
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> 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] YouTube shooting and risk assessment

2018-04-05 Thread Andy Mabbett
I'm sure most of you will be aware of the unfortunate events at
YouTube's HQ a couple fo days ago:

   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube_headquarters_shooting

Without giving away anything that might reveal vulnerabilities, does
the WMF have contingency plans for such an incident? What about at
community events in the US, and elsewhere?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
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] Amazon Echo' use of Wikipedia; CC license compliance?

2018-04-05 Thread Anthony Cole
 I see this from Brian Heater at Tech Crunch on 25 March:

"In a conversation earlier this week, Wikimedia’s Chief Revenue Office,
Lisa Gruwell told TechCrunch that this sort of usage doesn’t constitute any
sort of formal relationship. Most companies more or less hook into an API
to utilize that breadth of knowledge. It’s handy for sure, and *it’s all
well within Wikimedia’s fair use rules*, but as with Maher’s letter, the
CRO expressed some concerns about seemingly one-sided relationships ... *Smart
assistants are certainly playing by the applicable rules when it comes to
leveraging that information base.*"[1]

That article I link to has both Katherine (WMF ED) and Lisa (Chief Revenue
Officer) asking the companies who use our work for free to "give back." I
want them to give back too, but I don't absolve them of their obligation to
meaningfully attribute my work and share it with the same rights attached.
If it is the opinion of the WMF that these smart assistants are not
breaching my rights, I'd like to see the legal advice that opinion is based
on.

1.
https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/24/are-corporations-that-use-wikipedia-giving-back/

Anthony Cole


On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 5:47 PM, WereSpielChequers <
werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes of course the WMF can contact those who are detected reusing our
> content without fully complying with licenses and encourage them to comply.
>
> If a case were to go to court it would need to have one or more
> contributors who were willing to cooperate with WMF legal in the case. But
> I doubt there would be a shortage of contributors who were keen to do so.
>
> As for why the WMF should do so, here are three reasons:
>
> Each of our wikis is a crowd sourced project. Crowd sourcing requires a
> crowd, if a crowd settles down and stabilises it becomes a community. The
> community is broadly stable, but we need a steady flow of new wikimedians,
> and our only really effective way of recruiting new Wikimedians is for them
> to see the edit button on our sites. An increasing shift to our content
> being used without attribution is an existential threat to the project and
> hence to the WMF.
>
> Our communities are made up of volunteers with diverse motivations. For
> some of us the BY-SA part of the licensing is important, personally I feel
> good when i see one of my photos used by someone else but attributed to me.
> If the de facto policy of the WMF was to treat volunteer contributions as
> effectively CC0 this would be demotivating for some members of our
> community. I'm also active on another site where every member regularly
> gets stats on their readership, something I very much doubt would happen if
> it wasn't an effective mechanism to encourage continued participation.
>
> Every organisation needs money, the WMF gets most of its money by asking
> for it on wikipedia and other sites. Again, encouraging attribution back to
> Wikipedia etc tackles the existential threat of other sites treating
> wikipedia et al as CC0.
>
>
> WSC
>
> On 5 April 2018 at 08:04,  wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 04/04/2018 08:36 PM, Anthony Cole wrote:
> > > I'm curious also. I release my articles under "attribution, share
> alike"
> > > and rely on WMF to preserve those rights.
> >
> > Why are you relying on the WMF? Wikipedia contributors (like yourself)
> > are the ones who own copyright to the articles - the WMF doesn't. Unless
> > you've granted/transferred copyright to the WMF (or some other license
> > enforcement agreement), I don't think they can pursue legal action for
> > you or other Wikipedians. (IANAL, etc.)
> >
> > -- Legoktm
> >
> >
> ___
> 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] Amazon Echo' use of Wikipedia; CC license compliance?

2018-04-05 Thread WereSpielChequers
Yes of course the WMF can contact those who are detected reusing our
content without fully complying with licenses and encourage them to comply.

If a case were to go to court it would need to have one or more
contributors who were willing to cooperate with WMF legal in the case. But
I doubt there would be a shortage of contributors who were keen to do so.

As for why the WMF should do so, here are three reasons:

Each of our wikis is a crowd sourced project. Crowd sourcing requires a
crowd, if a crowd settles down and stabilises it becomes a community. The
community is broadly stable, but we need a steady flow of new wikimedians,
and our only really effective way of recruiting new Wikimedians is for them
to see the edit button on our sites. An increasing shift to our content
being used without attribution is an existential threat to the project and
hence to the WMF.

Our communities are made up of volunteers with diverse motivations. For
some of us the BY-SA part of the licensing is important, personally I feel
good when i see one of my photos used by someone else but attributed to me.
If the de facto policy of the WMF was to treat volunteer contributions as
effectively CC0 this would be demotivating for some members of our
community. I'm also active on another site where every member regularly
gets stats on their readership, something I very much doubt would happen if
it wasn't an effective mechanism to encourage continued participation.

Every organisation needs money, the WMF gets most of its money by asking
for it on wikipedia and other sites. Again, encouraging attribution back to
Wikipedia etc tackles the existential threat of other sites treating
wikipedia et al as CC0.


WSC

On 5 April 2018 at 08:04,  wrote:

>
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> On 04/04/2018 08:36 PM, Anthony Cole wrote:
> > I'm curious also. I release my articles under "attribution, share alike"
> > and rely on WMF to preserve those rights.
>
> Why are you relying on the WMF? Wikipedia contributors (like yourself)
> are the ones who own copyright to the articles - the WMF doesn't. Unless
> you've granted/transferred copyright to the WMF (or some other license
> enforcement agreement), I don't think they can pursue legal action for
> you or other Wikipedians. (IANAL, etc.)
>
> -- Legoktm
>
>
___
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] Amazon Echo' use of Wikipedia; CC license compliance?

2018-04-05 Thread Anthony Cole
We're not at that point yet. I would like to know whether an informal
conversation between WMF and Amazon on this topic has begun, though.

Anthony Cole


On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 3:04 PM, Kunal Mehta  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 04/04/2018 08:36 PM, Anthony Cole wrote:
> > I'm curious also. I release my articles under "attribution, share alike"
> > and rely on WMF to preserve those rights.
>
> Why are you relying on the WMF? Wikipedia contributors (like yourself)
> are the ones who own copyright to the articles - the WMF doesn't. Unless
> you've granted/transferred copyright to the WMF (or some other license
> enforcement agreement), I don't think they can pursue legal action for
> you or other Wikipedians. (IANAL, etc.)
>
> -- Legoktm
>
> ___
> 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] Amazon Echo' use of Wikipedia; CC license compliance?

2018-04-05 Thread Kunal Mehta
Hi,

On 04/04/2018 08:36 PM, Anthony Cole wrote:
> I'm curious also. I release my articles under "attribution, share alike"
> and rely on WMF to preserve those rights.

Why are you relying on the WMF? Wikipedia contributors (like yourself)
are the ones who own copyright to the articles - the WMF doesn't. Unless
you've granted/transferred copyright to the WMF (or some other license
enforcement agreement), I don't think they can pursue legal action for
you or other Wikipedians. (IANAL, etc.)

-- Legoktm

___
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,