I am just forking this thread so the title reflects the needed discussion and we avoid derailling again to non directly / personal topics.
Le dim. 27 juin 2021 à 9:55 PM, Katherine Maher <[email protected]> a écrit : > Hi folks, > > Leaving aside everything else for a minute, I want to reply to Maggie’s > statement regarding the T&S case here. As someone with direct and specific > knowledge of the issue, I feel responsibility to affirm Maggie’s version of > events. > > Although we provided notice to the board that we were considering a > difficult T&S case regarding a well known admin on English Wikipedia, we > did not consult with the board on the case. When we made the determination, > following two warnings, to take action regarding the user, it was at the > recommendation of staff following an investigation that followed all > standard operating practices. The Board was not notified in advance of our > decision to move to action; something that was in line with existing > policies and IMHO, in line with an important distinction between governance > and operations, but also arguably may have contributed to some of the mess > that we’re all familiar with. > > I have taken responsibility in various fora for this decision, and > accepted the subsequent criticisms, many of them legitimate, by community > members. I continue to bear that responsibility, and it is precisely > because it was my responsibility that I want to reiterate that there was no > COI of María in any capacity. > While I would handle that case somewhat differently were we to revisit it, > that is besides the point. > > Whatever conversation the community wishes to have with Foundation > leadership about governance and this recent decision is up to the > community. However, I would encourage to avoid conflating these issues, as > there is no basis for the insinuation or accusation, and unnecessarily > muddies the waters for valid concerns. > > Cheers, > Katherine > > On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 13:42 Maggie Dennis <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, everybody. >> >> It’s Sunday, and there’s a lot of meetings today, and I wrestled with >> whether to say this without necessarily having the full time to think about >> all the ways I could say it wrong and potentially make misunderstandings >> worse. We’re having a meeting on Tuesday specifically to discuss issues of >> concern to people around this consultancy. But I’d like to openly address >> the suggestion that María may have influenced a Trust & Safety case here. >> >> First: it is against policy (and it is a policy I helped write and >> support whole-heartedly) to talk about the specifics of Trust & Safety >> behavioral investigations in public in order as much as possible to protect >> the privacy and dignity of all involved. Public in this case includes even >> among staff, most of whom have no need to know when a case is even under >> review. We do discuss these cases with some volunteer groups who have >> signed non-disclosure agreements, but even that is limited. Only recently >> have we created a body who can review Trust & Safety case files on >> appropriate appeal. >> >> Given this policy, I’m going to have to be uncomfortably vague, but I >> want to address and firmly deny rumors that any Board member has ever >> attempted to influence Trust & Safety (T&S) to take office action >> (including warnings) in relation to any behavioral investigation. (See the >> Meta >> page, which includes a list of the individuals >> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WMF_Global_Ban_Policy>.) I know that my >> saying so isn’t necessarily going to reassure folks. Some may think I’m >> deluded, and some may think I’m lying, but for me silence on this point is >> unacceptable. >> >> Neither María nor any other trustee ever exerted any influence over any >> Trust & Safety case. The Board does not provide guidance on how cases >> should be handled unless asked (which is rare). Even executive staff do not >> weigh in on Trust & Safety recommended approaches until an investigation >> itself is complete and has been reviewed by an attorney. >> >> I know this because I’ve been involved in one aspect or another in Trust >> & Safety’s behavioral investigations since 2012, when we imposed our first >> Foundation ban. Over the years, we have created a process by which >> behavioral investigations may be launched by request from anyone; Trust & >> Safety staff review all requests, no matter who makes it, to determine if a >> request is within their mandate. If it is, they open a case. >> >> Speaking candidly, in the 9 years I’ve been involved in this, I have >> seen bias when issues touch on treatment of staff members or Board members >> or those who are close to them. But it is a bias against taking action >> that might make it look like the Foundation is trying to silence legitimate >> criticism. Those of you who handle behavioral issues on our projects are >> very aware that “trolls” are not our major problem. People who are hostile >> with no reason are easily taken care of. The problem is when people who go >> on the attack may have reason (even if only partial) to be unhappy. It’s >> hard to address the way people approach problems independently of those >> problems. It’s hard to say “You have a point, but you can’t handle it that >> way” without some people seeing you as trying to avoid the point. But >> there are some approaches to problems that are unacceptable. Staff, Board >> members, and those who are close to them deserve reasonable protection, >> too. >> >> The involvement of anyone close to María in a behavioral investigation >> has only been speculation by some in community. That makes it questionable >> for me to say this, but I think it’s important to say: it is true that one >> of the several people who reached out with concerns about Fram had a >> connection to a member of the Board. This did have an impact on the >> case. The impact it had was that Fram was given two warnings (about a >> year apart) before we took office action instead of the more common one. >> (Fram has acknowledged receiving warnings >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community_response_to_the_Wikimedia_Foundation%27s_ban_of_Fram>, >> otherwise I would feel very uncomfortable noting this myself.) >> >> Whether consulting with María at this moment and in this way is >> appropriate or not is a discussion we will have on Tuesday. However, it >> disturbs me to know that some people claim María acted inappropriately in >> regards to a Trust & Safety case when I know better. Granted, I was on >> leave when the final office action was enacted, but I was not on leave in >> the months and years that preceded it and was not unaware of the >> discussions surrounding that case. I wouldn’t feel very good about myself >> as a person if I didn’t push back on that misimpression of her behavior in >> that case and explain that (I fully and honestly believe) any bias goes the >> other way. >> >> As uncomfortable as it will make me, I will not respond to other >> questions about this case in this venue, with this audience, although (as >> always) I am happy to talk about Trust & Safety’s general approach with >> people and will do so at other opportunities. >> >> Best regards, >> Maggie >> >> -- >> Maggie Dennis >> She/her/hers >> Vice President, Community Resilience & Sustainability >> Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines >> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >> Public archives at >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/U7NQL5CRIX2THMSPFH6DS2BSIPTHCKSU/ >> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > > -- > *Katherine R. Maher* > > [email protected] > @krmaher <https://www.twitter.com/krmaher> > > US: +1 203 858 7316 > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines > at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/B45MK3D3IDFC6RTBKZ5ZKFAUKXKKBDZS/ > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/GHGIOPKSKVPQAANDQCDC2F3WHRNEUVOF/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
