On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Cristian Consonni
wrote:
> 2014-05-20 18:14 GMT+02:00 Luis Villa :
> > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Pete Forsyth
> wrote:
> >> (2)
> >>
> >should not be judged poorly for not having had the right opportunity
> to
> >>defend users in court the way the r
2014-05-20 18:14 GMT+02:00 Luis Villa :
> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Pete Forsyth wrote:
>> (2)
>>
>should not be judged poorly for not having had the right opportunity to
>>defend users in court the way the report defines it.
>>
>
> On the second point: we regularly defend user priv
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Pete Forsyth wrote:
>- The report specifically addresses the two stars Wikimedia "missed,"
>stating that (1) it plans to publish a transparency report in July and
> (2)
>
should not be judged poorly for not having had the right opportunity to
>defen
Thanks for posting this, Cristian!
I have been a big fan of this campaign for several years, and have urged
EFF to include Wikimedia. So pleased to see this becoming a reality! A
couple observations:
- Most of the companies with 6 stars have been rated for one or more
years prior.
- Ther
Hi,
EFF has published this transparency report called "Who has your back" which
now includes Wikimedia (I think they are referring to the Wikimedia
Foundation, though).
Well, the result is slightly disappointing:
https://www.eff.org/who-has-your-back-government-data-requests-2014#wikimedia
About
