On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 at 03:14, bawolff <bawolff...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank your for your well considered response. I know this can be an > emotionally draining topic and I appreciate your engagement. > > Thanks, > Brian
This has been one of the longer email discussion threads, itself made controversial due to quasi-official interventions apparently made with the intention of closing it down early. I agree, this does make the topic draining but it has been an important one to have, if the CoC and the non-transparent procedures that seem to enforce it and interpret it are to be seen to be held to account. I would like to join in the thanks from Brian, and extend that to thank all those that have expressed well supported views in the discussion. Naturally, we should all be thankful to the original whistle-blower, as whether you feel this was undue or not, it has resulted in an opportunity for improvement for a fairer and more open process. It would be jolly nice if CoC Committee members might use this case as a reason to re-examine the ethical need for the Committee to adopt a governance policy that respects and protects whistle-blowers, even if the contents of such a complaint or query may damage the reputation of the Committee, and even if the whistle-blower uses an external forum like this email list. Around the middle of the discussion there was mention that the way that WMF employees and unpaid volunteers are handled under the Code of Conduct is different. A later response was framed in a way that made it appear that this was a false statement. Though the CoC itself does not mention employees, this was discussed in detail during its creation, along with requirements being firmly stated by WMF legal. As far as I am aware, the Committee does process complaints involving WMF employees differently, because it will share evidence, and presumably any statements made even if these are not "objective evidence", with WMF legal and WMF HR. It is also clear from past statements by WMF legal that any information shared with the WMF is not guaranteed to remain confidential, there are no guarantees as to who will have access to the information or allegations or if they will ever be deleted from WMF databases, and that WMF internal procedures and policies will offer no protection or compensation for non-employees.[1][2] If my understanding of the current state of affairs is wrong, I welcome a factual and supported correction. 1. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_Conduct/Archive_1#Reports_involving_WMF_employees 2. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_Conduct/Archive_2#September_22,_2016_revision_by_WMF_Legal Thanks Fae -- fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
