I have to say that there is an unnecessary lack of transparency which seems
to get worse. In or around May 2012 I emailed the audit committee on EN:WP
to ask about checkuser run on my account and got a polite and informative
reply. In or around May 2014 an identically worded query got a polite
Contrary to an individual request for information (who did ABC) I guess
that such a process question would be perfect for the ombuds committee (was
this process correctly followed) or by extension the board.
Lodewijk
2014-08-03 21:45 GMT+02:00 Richard Farmbrough rich...@farmbrough.co.uk:
I
Actually, Ombudsman Commission is not a secret police or Interpol. We
have no any instrumentation of investigation, except access to
checkuser logs and asking plaintiff and the checkuser for some
details and then compare all this information. This is all we can do
regarding investigation of
On 03/08/2014, Richard Farmbrough rich...@farmbrough.co.uk wrote:
I have to say that there is an unnecessary lack of transparency which seems
to get worse. In or around May 2012 I emailed the audit committee on EN:WP
to ask about checkuser run on my account and got a polite and informative
On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 7:25 AM, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 7:25 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
Are you able to specify which policy or statement entitles you to the
information you request? I can find no basis for it in the privacy policy,
the Meta
On 2 August 2014 06:25, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 7:25 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
Are you able to specify which policy or statement entitles you to the
information you request? I can find no basis for it in the privacy
policy,
the Meta
Hello,
just a few remarks from the OC about this case.
2014-08-01 22:19 GMT+02:00 Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com:
Hi all,
On 27 May 2014 I received an email back from the OC which basically
said that because no personal information was divulged, there was no
breach of the WMF
On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 1:25 AM, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 7:25 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
Russavia said something nice to someone in 2013 on their retirement,
and raised a formal complaint about an unknown CU's action in 2014.
How are these
On 2 August 2014 09:17, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm guessing you mean June 2014, as the only earlier investigation was
April 2013, which was a royal mess.
No. The April 2013 check was extended beyond en. No reason not to extend
it to commons.
--
geni
Thogo, et al
On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Thomas Goldammer tho...@gmail.com wrote:
1) There was indeed a leak of my CU data. An unknown Commons CU had
indeed leaked my CU data to another person who was NOT a CU on
Commons. The information given to this non-CU person included the very
name
On 2 August 2014 17:18, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote:
...
i personally do not care about the russavia case in particular i must
say. but i care about the (non-)care of persons having access to
account data triggered by a bad policy. imo
* checkuser usage must be requested
On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 9:19 PM, K. Peachey p858sn...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 August 2014 17:18, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote:
...
i personally do not care about the russavia case in particular i must
say. but i care about the (non-)care of persons having access to
On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
..
I could be wrong, but it was my understanding that the logs are maintained
indefinitely but the data is retained for only 3 months (i.e. the results
of the check that is recorded in the log).
The checkuser log are kept
Hi all,
On 27 April 2013, one of our then-Commons checkusers ran a check on my
account on that project. I only found out this information in May of
this year, after twelve months of asking the simple question -- was a
checkuser run on my account? For twelve months this question went
unanswered by
On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com
wrote:
Commission, nor the WMF Board.
Given this, I am asking very publicly the following questions:
* (1) on what grounds a CheckUser action was performed on my account
on Wikimedia Commons?
* (2) who requested that it
On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 7:25 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
Are you able to specify which policy or statement entitles you to the
information you request? I can find no basis for it in the privacy policy,
the Meta checkuser policy or the checkuser page on Commons. Can you also
outline for
16 matches
Mail list logo
