[Wikimediauk-l] International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance

2013-11-28 Thread Stevie Benton
Hello everyone, Wikimedia UK has been asked to consider signing a document supporting these International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillancehttps://en.necessaryandproportionate.org/TEXT In principle I think this is worthwhile and shows that we are on the

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance

2013-11-28 Thread
On 28 November 2013 13:24, Stevie Benton stevie.ben...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hello everyone, Wikimedia UK has been asked to consider signing a document supporting these International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance In principle I think this is

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance

2013-11-28 Thread Martin Poulter
Fae, Stevie hasn't said there were out of scope objections, he's just open-mindedly consulting us about whether we think it's out of scope. On 28 November 2013 15:18, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote: On 28 November 2013 13:24, Stevie Benton stevie.ben...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hello everyone,

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance

2013-11-28 Thread Richard Symonds
Well, it's not really directly linked to our objects (for the benefit of the public, to promote and support the widest possible public access to, use of and contribution to Open Content of an encyclopaedic or educational nature or of similar utility to the general public). That said, ensuring that

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance

2013-11-28 Thread Stevie Benton
Thanks for the replies. As Martin notes, I haven't said it is out of scope, but that *some may* feel that way. It is a tricky question, actually. If I had to call it on my own view, I'd say sign it as it is worthwhile. Free and open being the key words here - if there is widespread and secretive

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Amazon Tax avoidance

2013-11-28 Thread James Farrar
That's outrageous. Why are we wasting money? On 28 Nov 2013 02:32, rexx r...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote: About £200,000 per year. It's a pity Amazon isn't as publicly spirited as WMUK. -- Rexx On 27 November 2013 21:38, James Farrar james.far...@gmail.com wrote: How much more tax than

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Amazon Tax avoidance

2013-11-28 Thread rexx
Ask Sue Gardner. On 28/11/2013, James Farrar james.far...@gmail.com wrote: That's outrageous. Why are we wasting money? On 28 Nov 2013 02:32, rexx r...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote: About £200,000 per year. It's a pity Amazon isn't as publicly spirited as WMUK. -- Rexx On 27 November 2013

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance

2013-11-28 Thread Richard Symonds
Martin makes a good point and now that I'm off work for a few days ill reply as a volunteer: I would be in favour of signing this. is something I believe most members would agree with signing too. On Nov 28, 2013 3:31 PM, Stevie Benton stevie.ben...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Thanks for the

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Amazon Tax avoidance

2013-11-28 Thread
On 28 November 2013 23:47, rexx r...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote: Ask Sue Gardner. On 28/11/2013, James Farrar james.far...@gmail.com wrote: That's outrageous. Why are we wasting money? On 28 Nov 2013 02:32, rexx r...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote: +1 + Ask the WMUK board about the deal. As a trustee I