To be honest, anyone "whistleblowing" from outside the organisation.. well, it's rather hard to be punished by the foundation employment-wise when you don't work for them.
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 11:10 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dal...@gmail.com>wrote: > On 14 July 2010 23:00, Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Sue Gardner, 14/07/2010 18:33: > > > >> * Anyone who has information about malfeasance or misfeasance inside > Wikimedia should take a look at our Whistleblower Policy, which lays out > process for escalation to authorities. The policy is intended to cover > serious and actual problems (rather than for example rumour or worries), but > it's probably better to overreport than underreport. And it is good to have > a confidential avenue. I can tell you our Whistleblower Policy has worked > well for us in the past: I'm glad it exists. > > > > Anyone? Looks like it applies only to employees. > > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Whistleblower_Policy > > "entity with whom Wikimedia Foundation Inc has a business relationship" > > includes chapters? > > Indeed. I'm not sure why Sue mentioned the Whistleblower Policy. > Whistleblower policies are about what an employee needs to do to make > sure they don't get fired for reporting things to the authorities. > It's irrelevant for anyone else. The general idea that it's good to > report things to the ED, Chair of the Board or Chair of the Audit > Committee (as appropriate) is a good one, but that isn't because it > says so in the Whistleblower Policy. It's just because it's a good way > to get the problem solved. > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l