> > *unless you have a very good reason to do so, and their real-life identity > is of direct relevance to the issue you are reporting on*
This such a vague statement, every time someone is named it can be said to be relevant, identifying a person enhances their comment or diminishes their comment depending on what the author is trying to achieve. Placing emphasis on a person, their location, age, occupation is always arguable as putting them in the "right context" where the "right context" supports your outcome and POV. The UCoC enforcement will always be a weapon and have imbalances in an individual's ability to respond to accusation. On Wed, 3 May 2023 at 14:47, Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Lodewijk, > > Thanks. You hit the nail on the head in your last paragraph where you say, > > "I'm however not particularly surprised that this issue eventually arises, > as this was bound to happen. I am also curious for what the intended policy > implications would be (based on the current UCoC) and maybe then there > could a conversation be had if that is indeed what we wanted to achieve." > > That is exactly what I was hoping us to have a conversation about. (My > first mail in this thread was addressed to the Board members, who I am sure > are indeed well aware of the essay. You can find press coverage of it here > <https://slate.com/technology/2023/04/how-wikipedia-covers-the-history-of-the-holocaust-in-poland.html> > .) > > As far as the arbitration case is concerned, ArbCom took the very rare > step of self-initiating this case in response to the essay. I didn't start > the case, nor am I a party to it. > > Best, > Andreas > > On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:03 PM effe iets anders <effeietsand...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Andreas, >> >> interesting questions. I don't think your assumption "As you are no doubt >> aware, a Wikimedian and a non-Wikimedian co-author recently published..." >> is true. I was definitely not aware of it, and I doubt many others are >> either. I was able to piece together some of your claims, but not all >> (simply due to lack of time, I'm sure). Just offering this information so >> that you can provide the necessary context as needed. I was unable to dive >> deep enough to give this proper attention. One thing I did note was that >> you were the person who started the arbitration case. It might be >> beneficial for this discussion if someone else familiar with the matter, >> could summarize it. If only for the simple fact that they may have more >> appreciation of what is and isn't known by the wider community. (For >> example, I was unable to verify myself that the workplace and real name >> were indeed shared, and that this information could not be assumed to be >> public knowledge) >> >> Assuming all your stated facts to be correct, I would actually not be >> certain what the right approach would be either. Surely, it can not be the >> intent to encourage doxxing off-platform, but we can't attempt to block >> academic discussion on complex matters either. Wikipedia does not live in a >> vacuum. I would rephrase your question "are [Wikimedians] permitted to >> share contributors' private information such as their workplace address in >> these various venues, without obtaining explicit consent to do so? " to >> something like: "Should Wikimedians be sanctioned when they disclose >> private information without explicit consent in the source of academic (or >> political, societal) discourse outside of Wikimedia". >> >> I'm however not particularly surprised that this issue eventually arises, >> as this was bound to happen. I am also curious for what the intended policy >> implications would be (based on the current UCoC) and maybe then there >> could a conversation be had if that is indeed what we wanted to achieve. >> >> Lodewijk >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 6:01 AM Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Dear Wikimedia Foundation Trustees and all, >>> >>> The Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) has been in force for some time. >>> The Enforcement Guidelines have now been endorsed by the community. But as >>> with any new document, shared understandings and clarifications must >>> develop over time. Until then, practical enforcement is anything but >>> routine. Here is an example. >>> >>> Section 3.1 of the UCoC states that the following is harassment: >>> >>> *Disclosure of personal data (Doxing): sharing other contributors' >>> private information, such as name, place of employment, physical or email >>> address without their explicit consent either on the Wikimedia projects or >>> elsewhere, or sharing information concerning their Wikimedia activity >>> outside the projects.* >>> >>> As you are no doubt aware, a Wikimedian and a non-Wikimedian co-author >>> recently published an academic essay criticising aspects of the English >>> Wikipedia's Holocaust coverage. In their essay, the authors mention the >>> legal names and the places of employment of two longstanding Wikipedia >>> contributors who, as WMF Trust & Safety will confirm, have suffered years >>> of egregious harassment because of their Wikimedia participation. I >>> understand this has included threats to their children, calls to their >>> workplace asking for them to be fired, etc. >>> >>> Given this history, the authors' decision to share precise information >>> about these contributors' workplaces in their academic essay struck me as >>> ill advised. It is hard to justify on scholarly grounds – the Holocaust >>> topic area is unrelated to the academic positions held by these two >>> Wikipedians. And surely it must have occurred to the authors that providing >>> information on their workplaces might exacerbate the harassment they are >>> already experiencing, of which the authors were well aware. >>> >>> Needless to say, neither of the two contributors gave their consent to >>> having their names and workplaces shared in the essay, which criticises >>> them severely – and in at least some cases very unfairly. >>> >>> Given that explicit consent is what the UCoC requires for sharing of >>> personal information, sharing details of these Wikimedians' workplaces – >>> especially in the context of harsh and inflammatory criticism of their >>> editing, and a long history of prior harassment suffered by these >>> contributors – struck me as a bright-line violation of UCoC Section 3.1, >>> specifically: >>> >>> *Disclosure of personal data (Doxing): sharing other contributors' >>> private information, such as name, place of employment, physical or email >>> address without their explicit consent either on the Wikimedia projects or >>> elsewhere, or sharing information concerning their Wikimedia activity >>> outside the projects.* >>> >>> The reason I am mentioning this here is that the English Arbitration >>> Committee, which opened an arbitration case soon after publication of the >>> essay, appears largely to have taken a different view to date, preferring >>> to apply the most charitable interpretation of a local English Wikipedia >>> policy instead of the UCoC definition.[1] >>> >>> Local policy on English Wikipedia says that sharing a contributor's >>> personal information (on Wikipedia) is not harassment if said contributor >>> has voluntarily posted their own information, or links to such information, >>> on Wikipedia at some time in the past.[2] In this specific case, one of the >>> two contributors once, over a decade ago, posted a link to a Dramatica page >>> containing their name and a previous place of employment (different from >>> their current place of employment as shared in the essay). I understand >>> they tried later on to have that edit oversighed but were refused. The >>> other contributor is open about their legal name and workplace on >>> Wikipedia. >>> >>> As we can see, the English Wikipedia's local policy is not aligned with >>> the UCoC. The UCoC – which we are told defines a minimum standard that >>> takes precedence over any and all local policies and must not be ignored or >>> circumvented – demands that Wikimedians wanting to share other >>> contributors' personal information obtain "explicit consent" from the >>> contributors concerned. "Explicit consent" is generally considered to be a >>> much higher standard than implied consent.[3] "Explicit consent" is telling >>> an author, "Yes, it is fine for you to mention my name and workplace in >>> your essay." >>> >>> And unlike local policy, the UCoC says that it covers conduct outside of >>> Wikimedia spaces as well. It says it applies to – >>> >>> *all Wikimedia projects, technical spaces, in-person and virtual events, >>> as well as the following instances:* >>> >>> *Private, public and semi-public interactions* >>> *Discussions of disagreement and expression of solidarity across >>> community members* >>> *Issues of technical development* >>> *Aspects of content contribution* >>> *Cases of representing affiliates/communities with external partners* >>> >>> On the face of it, "public interactions" and "expressions of >>> disagreement" would seem to include writings a Wikimedian publishes about >>> another contributor in a journal, a newspaper, a blog, etc., or statements >>> they make about them in press interviews. >>> >>> ArbCom on the other hand appears to have taken the view that the UCoC >>> only applies to places "like Wikimedia listservs, affiliate zoom calls, and >>> Wikimedia in-person events. But that doesn't include peer reviewed papers." >>> >>> So, the question I am now unclear about is: Are Wikimedians >>> communicating about Wikipedia outside of Wikimedia spaces – from academic >>> journals, newspapers and TV interviews to blogs and discussion forums – >>> bound by the UCoC (and specifically Section 3.1) or not? Very specifically, >>> are they permitted to share contributors' private information such as their >>> workplace address in these various venues, without obtaining explicit >>> consent to do so? >>> >>> Clarification would be very welcome. I feel we do need some guidance as >>> to what the words in the UCoC are intended to mean in practice, and how >>> much leeway local projects should have in interpreting its intent. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Andreas >>> >>> >>> [1] >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World_War_II_and_the_history_of_Jews_in_Poland/Analysis#Analysis_of_Andreas'_evidence_(UCoC_violation) >>> [2] >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Harassment#Posting_of_personal_information >>> [3] See e.g. the GDPR-related explanation here: >>> https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/consent/what-is-valid-consent/#what5 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, 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/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/WOYBUELH4EQ7ZQEBUKRS3GDPWVWGIXUY/ >>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, 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/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/CERXNJOID2U5CZQYRQDBVZ6INKS7WYDP/ >> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, 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/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/BZIAUVF2WOXR5T7M7E3FIENGMRNRSOCP/ > To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org -- Boodarwun Gnangarra 'ngany dabakarn koorliny arn boodjera dardoon ngalang Nyungar koortaboodjar'
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, 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/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ZTUNWQUVCBWKYKMWIPPJMTWFJSGYGENT/ To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
