Keegan Peterzell wrote:
The discussion, as I was clarifying, was about requiring agents that had not Identified to do so. There was no re-identifying require, which is th point that I was making.
Oh yes, that's right. Thanks for the clarification, Keegan; I'm sorry about the confusion.
The two are related. Both measures seek transparency, one to the WMF and one to the community. The fact that the community side has worked is interesting when there is pushback to private transparency.
The community side, as you call it, has received its share of comments, criticism, and suggestions from OTRS volunteers when the issue was brought to their (our) attention.
There have been many voices opposing the publication or at least concerned about the possible implications of the change, just as there are some voices expressing concerns about the apparent lack of details and deeper thought behind some parts of the policy.
I don't think this is something new or interesting per se; people usually tend to ask tough questions when it comes to their privacy, and I can only hope we will be able to work out the details, and that the WMF will be able to respond to people's concerns.
Tomasz _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimediaemail@example.com Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>