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

2018-04-06 Thread James Alexander
Hi all, Thanks for bringing this up. As you can imagine, we've been considering this on an ongoing basis as well as specifically after the recent shootings—and as Philippe and Gnangarra have pointed out, there are good reasons we can't share complete specifics. Still, here's a bit on our current

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

2018-04-06 Thread Alphos OGame
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)

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 >

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

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

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

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

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

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

[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