To edit is to say something, Andreas Kolbe. To me it is very fortunate that the right to anonymity takes presedence over COI-editing. Edits can be changed or removed, a personal identity cannot. Regards, Sir48
2014/1/6 Andreas Kolbe <[email protected]> > Well, if you don't say anything, Sir48, you are not misrepresenting > anything, are you? > > It's a path many people have chosen in Wikipedia. They just remain silent. > The right to remain silent about who you are and who you work for is > enshrined in the principle of anonymity. > > People (including the English Wikipedia's arbitration committee) have long > said that the policies guaranteeing the right to edit anonymously are in > tension with the guidelines discouraging editing with a conflict of > interest, and that the conflict between these two sets of policies and > guidelines is imperfectly resolved. > > And in the final analysis, the English Wikipedia's policy against > harassment and outing takes precedence over the conflict-of-interest > guideline. > > At any rate, conflict-of-interest editing is discouraged, but not forbidden > in the English Wikipedia, while posting another editor's employer is a > banning offence (unless the editor has previous disclosed it himself on > Wikipedia). > > That this creates a lucrative market for companies like Wiki-PR should not > come as a surprise. > > While non-transparent paid editing does not seem to me to violate the > Wikimedia terms of use, transparent paid editing clearly does not violate > them either. Surely, the way forward lies that way. > > But while the German Wikipedia community for example is quite welcoming to > paid editors who act transparently – the German Wikipedia even has verified > company accounts like User:Coca_Cola_Germany – the English Wikipedia > community is exceedingly hostile to such users, to the point of blocking > company account names *on sight*, with the result that many such editors > prefer to fly under the radar, using a made-up name and the shield of the > anonymity policy. > > Andreas > > > On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 6:16 PM, Thyge <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I'm not in principle against transparent paid editing, but it could > > actually be considered to violate the ToU's wording: "misrepresenting > your > > affiliation with any individual or entity" > > > > Regards, > > Sir48 > > > > > > 2014/1/6 Andreas Kolbe <[email protected]> > > > > > Sure, Todd. But that is not actually in the Wikimedia terms of use. The > > > terms of use say, > > > > > > > > > - Attempting to impersonate another user or individual, > > misrepresenting > > > your affiliation with any individual or entity, or using the > username > > of > > > another user with the intent to deceive; > > > > > > > > > They do not say, > > > > > > > > > - Attempting to impersonate another user or individual, > > misrepresenting > > > your affiliation with any individual or entity, or *using more than > > > username* with the intent to deceive; > > > > > > > > > That whole section is about impersonating other people, making out that > > you > > > represent someone you do not represent, etc. Silence as to one's > > > affiliations and identity has always been permitted on Wikimedia > > projects. > > > > > > Andreas > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Todd Allen <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > They are, however, avoiding scrutiny, as evidenced by widespread > > > > disapproval of their actions. That is not a permissible use of socks. > > The > > > > community expects to place more scrutiny on paid editors, not less. > > > > On Jan 6, 2014 6:23 AM, "Andreas Kolbe" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > That doesn't follow to me from that wording, Nathan. The English > > > > Wikipedia > > > > > for example allows socking to enable contributors to contribute to > > > > articles > > > > > that they would rather not have their real-life name or normal > > Internet > > > > > persona associated with. > > > > > > > > > > User:John Smith is allowed to create an account named > > > > > User:ColourfulCharacter to edit those articles. In doing so, he is > > not > > > > > using "the username *of another user* with the intent to deceive". > > > > > > > > > > There is no other user of that name. (The only exception would be > if > > > > there > > > > > were a user called User:ColorfulCharacter, say, and Smith's intent > > was > > > to > > > > > create confusion between the two accounts.) > > > > > > > > > > User:John Smith is using a secondary screen name to obscure the > fact > > > that > > > > > both accounts are operated by the same person. And that is allowed. > > > > > > > > > > I don't even see that Wiki-PR infringed the letter of that section, > > as > > > a > > > > > normal person would read it. Just like John Smith, they did not use > > the > > > > > name of some other user. They created multiple accounts. There was > no > > > > other > > > > > user whose username they used, or whom they tried to impersonate. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Nathan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Andreas Kolbe < > [email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nathan, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am unable to find a mention of sockpuppetry in the Terms of > > Use, > > > > > > whether > > > > > > > in Section 4 or elsewhere. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't think there could be such a mention, really, given that > > > > project > > > > > > > policies recognise a number of legitimate uses of socks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The term isn't used, but the behavior is clearly encompassed by > the > > > > > > prohibition described in the "Engaging in False Statements, > > > > Impersonation > > > > > > or Fraud" - specifically "using the username of another user with > > the > > > > > > intent to deceive." > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > Unsubscribe: > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > > ?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > Unsubscribe: > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > ?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > > > [email protected] > > > > Unsubscribe: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
