On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 12:03 PM, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The relevant paragraph appears to be > http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sokpop#Ontsnappingsclausule > > The Google translation is "In order to be unblocked, the person behind > the corresponding IP address is a letter (paper) to a community trust > staff." > > Does it actually mean "staff" in Dutch? Does it imply *in any way* > that the person to contact is officially sanctioned to deal with > private information? > The Dutch word is "medewerker" which most closely translates to "coworker", it does not have official connotations. > > http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blokkeringsmeldingen#Ontsnappingsclausule > > The Google translation for this one appears to quite definitely be > trying to imply official status. Does it carry such implications in > the original Dutch? > I don't think so, but to be sure I would want to know from which wording you are drawing these implications. > It doesn't matter if Huib was blocked for good reason. This still > looks very like a privacy disaster in the making, and the Foundation, > and particularly the staff relating to privacy concerns, need to look > into it very closely. > I do think it's a bad policy - apart from the privacy concerns I see no good reason for it either. It's not like it's easier to check whether someone is using a sock puppet when we know who they are (that's a part of the policy that I DO agree with: that when someone who has abused sock puppets is allowed re-entry in the project, they may not use sock puppets any more even non-abusively). -- André Engels, andreeng...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
