On March 1, Jimmy Wales wrote:[1]

things like standard boilerplate language to be signed by
> all employees doesn't strike me as something in and of itself to be kept
> private - there is a valid interest in showing that our policies are
> fair and humane for employees, responsible in terms of the privacy of
> personal information, etc.
>

Nothing appears to have happened since then – we seem to be no nearer to
transparency about the non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement
clauses WMF staff have to sign than we were two weeks ago, when discussion
around this topic kicked off in another thread.[2]

This seems to be a recurring (and daunting) pattern. People call for
transparency about a particular issue. Eventually, someone in a leadership
position responds that yes, demands for transparency about this issue are
quite reasonable, and in fact more transparency would be absolutely
desirable.

At this point, people relax, feeling they have been heard. The clamouring
crowd disperses. But in fact, nothing happens, and the same questions arise
again some weeks, months, years down the line.

Maggie, is this something your department could take on? It would be good
to have one identified person at the Foundation who is responsible for
tracking such queries and reporting back to the community, one way or the
other.

Andreas

[1] https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-March/082852.html
[2] http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/foundation/685183#685183
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to