I guess - Andy's main concern is about permission queues on Commons, as the trigger for his question was a case on Commons.
In fact - OTRS agents answering questions for general info queues have no special power - I mean they do not make any "secretive" decisions - they just inform about rules, customs, help newbies with technical issues and sometimes try to help or solve the problem to satisfy both - a plaintiff and the local wiki rules. Basically this was the idea of OTRS when it was created - so the feeling was that strict rules for just answering the questions and helping newbies are not very much needed. Add to this that there is a constant shortage of the active OTRS agents - as this work tends to be boring, repetitive and not rewarding at all - so you may understand why entry barrier for agents is kept as low as possible. If you want to be an OTRS agent - just put your name on OTRS page on meta - ask some of your friends on your local wiki to endorse you and one of the OTRS admins simply checks if your edit history is OK (not too short and with no signs that you have a tendency to be in constant conflict with your fellow Wikipedians) and that's it... It really does not need any extra regulations, as it works as it is now. However, for permission queues is the other issue - because acceptance or refusal of copyright agreement/claim is usually final, so it is quite a power, so I understand Andy's concern that there are no strict rules which are public. How it is practically screened has been already answered several times, but it is true that the process is not written down clearly - it was just developed naturally over time and consist of a) general copyright rules on Commons - which are already very complex and unclear - sometimes even contradictory with eachself and also they change over time, mainly in to direction to be more and more strict which is sometimes called "copyright paranoia" b) local copyright laws - which are also very complex and unclear in many jurisdictions and moreover one needs to know local language and local legal system to properly understand it and apply c) some practical customs, habits and technical rules related strictly to handling agreements via OTRS - the later is partially made public - I have already sent the links to the relevant pages but it was ignored - and partially made non-public. So, maybe - I say maybe - this system needs some sort of reform to make it more transparent and public - but do not expect that anyone can write rules that may cover every possible case - as they tend to be sometimes very complex and individual. And the system will never be 100% transparent - as its idea is to answers E-mails under general WMF privacy policy umbrella. pon., 20 lip 2020 o 09:03 effe iets anders <effeietsand...@gmail.com> napisał(a): > The problem I indicated is that 'OTRS' is a diffuse system of queues. There > are very few policies that govern 'OTRS', and even practices will differ > across queues. I'm for example a member of the teams that handle info-nl, > permissions-nl and wlx. All those behave very differently. > If you replace 'OTRS' with 'xyz queue on OTRS', someone from that queue may > be able to give you a coherent answer. If you're asking at the OTRS-level, > I don't think there's much policies/practices beyond the ones that I > mentioned. > > Lodewijk > > On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 3:17 PM Alessandro Marchetti <alexmar...@yahoo.it> > wrote: > > > I am now quite confused. Are we supposed to ask very specific questions > > about OTRS hoping to get an answer because if the questions are too > generic > > for sure we will never get a lot of answers? is that the general idea? > > > > ok if it helps, here are some of them > > 1. are OTRS policies categorized somehow? is there a page with > instruction > > with how to handle mails from private companies, from people, mails of > > legal issues, mail about copyright etc > > 2. how are OTRS agents reviewed? is it a peer-review process? is it > > regularly done? > > 3. do we have a policy that impose a minimal constant activity on > > content-reòated platform to keep OTRS flag? > > 4. how can a normal user file a request to deflag another operator? > > 5. is there a open log of OTRS requests, some place where minimal > > information related to a ticket can be disclosed (for example the date of > > arrival and maybe if it is regarding some content or some other topic?) > > 6. is there a open log of OTRS operators, where we can see when they got > > the flag, a link to the request and how many queue they are handling? > > > > I think it's enough for now. > > > > Alex > > Il lunedì 20 luglio 2020, 00:01:56 CEST, effe iets anders < > > effeietsand...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > > > > > > On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 7:55 AM Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> > > wrote: > > > > > On Sun, 19 Jul 2020 at 09:03, effe iets anders < > effeietsand...@gmail.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I rather have > > > > that people make their assumptions explicit so that you have an > > > opportunity > > > > to clarify, and use that as the basis for further conversation. > > > > > > You seem to be assuming - wrongly - that I have made assumptions which > > > I have not made explicit. > > > > > > Ironically, you have not explicitly stated your assumption. > > > > > > > My reading of this discussion is that there is a lot of 'secrecy' > > assumed > > > > > > No secrecy is being assumed. Too much secrecy is being observed. > > > > > > > where it is probably more a lack of existence of policies in the way > > Andy > > > > would like them to exist. This is a known problem with OTRS. > > > > > > It may well be that some policies that should exist, do not, or are > > > ''de facto'' without being written down. But until we see a > > > comprehensive list of those that do exist and are written, how can we > > > know? > > > > > > > I feel comfortable sharing that the set of OTRS-wide 'policies' that > is > > > on > > > > the wiki, is probably of little interest to this matter. > > > > > > I am very interested in seeing all those 'policies'; as others have > > > said they are. > > > > > > As noted earlier in this thread, I do not see how I could be any more > > > clear about my wish to see them. > > > > > > > This is why I > > > > noted that Jonatan's response could be misleading, because it implies > > all > > > > kind of secrecy that doesn't exist. > > > > > > It stated, not implied, that "the Confidentiality Agreement all OTRS > > > agents sign" prevented him from answering some of the questions asked > > > on-wiki in February, and quoted at the start of this thread. > > > > > > > There are actually a few policies > > > > linked at [[m:OTRS <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/OTRS>]], that > are > > > > simply copied there (Access, Activity policies). > > > > > > That page, and those linked from it, do not answer the questions to > > > which I have already referred. > > > > > > > There is some stuff about > > > > privacy, confidentiality and how to deal with mailing lists. Imho > > nothing > > > > that exciting. > > > > > > Perhaps not exciting to you; but I and others argue that such content > > > should nonetheless be public. We have been told that OTRS agents are > > > discussing the matter on their private email and IRC channels, but > > > then... Nothing. > > > > > > > OTRS is an immensely diverse system, and I don't think it's helpful > to > > > try > > > > to analyze that with overly broad questions. > > > > > > I do not accept that questions such as, for example: > > > > > > 5 how is OTRS overseen, and who by? > > > > > > 7 what is the process for the community to remove an > > > individual's OTRS permissions, if they fail to uphold > > > or abide by policy? > > > > > > 9 which individuals can make someone an OTRS agent, > > > or remove their permissions? > > > > > > 10 how are the individuals in #9 appointed and overseen? > > > > > > are "overly broad"; but if you think they are, how would you narrow > their > > > focus? > > > > > > > > First of all: you're framing my words and taking them out of context. I'm > > not going to waste further energy on that. > > > > Answering that would require me to actually understand what the > underlying > > issue is that you want to solve. I've given up on that. > > > > Lodewijk > > > > > > > -- > > > Andy Mabbett > > > @pigsonthewing > > > http://pigsonthewing.org.uk > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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> -- Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/ _______________________________________________ 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>
