I don't see that reasoning at all, actually. If roles are clearly separate,
having separate accounts is justifiable in my opinion.

When doing so in a way that could suggest larger support for a proposal
than is actually the case, it could make sense to make the connection
explicit in a disclosure (unless the connection is obvious). After all,
that is the main reason why communities have a problem with sockpuppetry.
In general it would be good to stay away with your personal account from
staff discussions and vice versa - although roles can change, and the
interest in a topic can remain after a job is finished. Buut in such cases,
disclosure may be needed.

I'm not sure why Fae is asking this question through this venue though -
but that is a discussion I recall from a week or so ago, so he's probably
aware of that.

Lodewijk



2017-02-27 19:30 GMT+01:00 Olatunde Isaac <reachout2is...@gmail.com>:

> Well, I don't think the WMF staffer is acting in bad faith but I do think
> they need to stick to a single account to avoid confusion. That being said,
> I don't think a discussion like this is necessary here.
>
> Best,
>
> Isaac
> Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless handheld from Glo Mobile.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adrian Raddatz <ajradd...@gmail.com>
> Sender: "Wikimedia-l" <wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org>Date: Mon,
> 27 Feb 2017 10:22:54
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List<wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Reply-To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Using WMF employee accounts and employee
> personal
>  accounts in the same community discussions
>
> A very, very small improvement to be sure. I think the guy in question gets
> at it when he says that he was no longer using paid time to contribute to
> the discussion.
>
> Mods, do you intentionally let the list be used as a platform for this
> constant flow of "omg the wmf is eeeeeviiiiilllll"? I seems to recall
> hearing about days when useful discussions happened here.
>
> On Feb 27, 2017 10:18 AM, "Fæ" <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > They have been repeatedly asked to stick to one account and refused to
> > do so. I suggest you read the other contributions from the account(s)
> > on the same page.
> >
> > Having an improved sockpuppeting policy would clear up any future
> > confusion by WMF employees or those that happen to interact with their
> > multiple accounts in discussions. However improvement here would be
> > made a lot easier if WMF HR stated what was their expected mixed usage
> > of accounts labelled "(WMF)" and personal accounts by the same
> > employee in the same discussion.
> >
> > Fae
> >
> > On 27 February 2017 at 18:11, Adrian Raddatz <ajradd...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > Oh please. It might be a bit confusing, but there's no huge issue here.
> > You
> > > could have just asked the person to remain on one account, rather than
> > > accuse him of sockpuppetry and ask an admin to block him if it
> continues.
> > > I'd call that a rule of basic interaction in an online setting - be
> > > curtious.
> > >
> > > On Feb 27, 2017 9:32 AM, "Fæ" <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Could someone with an appropriate level of managerial authority within
> > >> the WMF, such as an HR manager, confirm that staff accounts, which are
> > >> supposed to be identified with "(WMF)", are intended to be used for an
> > >> employee's job or contract role, rather than for personal editing and
> > >> publishing personal views?
> > >>
> > >> I ask this question after a long term employee has recently caused
> > >> confusion in a consensus building discussion, but refuses to stick to
> > >> one account when voting and expressing their personal views, making
> > >> this not a legitimate use of a staff account as this is outside of
> > >> their employed role. As the personal and employee accounts would
> > >> appear to most participants to represent the views of two separate
> > >> people, this can be judged as a breach of the local policy on
> > >> sockpuppet accounts, as well as a misuse of a staff account.
> > >>
> > >> I'm raising this here as the local policy appears insufficient to
> > >> convince the WMF employee that they are not using multiple accounts in
> > >> a legitimate way, consequently a clearer statement from the WMF may
> > >> help to refine the wording of the sockpuppet policy on the Mediawiki
> > >> project, and help decide whether it can apply to WMF employees in the
> > >> same way it already applies to unpaid volunteer contributors.
> > >>
> > >> Links
> > >> 1. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_Conduct/
> > >> Draft#WMF_employees_confusingly_using_personal_
> > and_staff_accounts_in_the_
> > >> same_consensus_building_discussion
> > >> 2. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Sock_puppetry
> > >> 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sock_puppetry#
> > Legitimate_uses
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Fae
> > >> --
> > >> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > >> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > >> 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>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > 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>
> >
> > --
> > fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > 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>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> 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>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> 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>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
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