On 9 January 2014 00:07, Frank Schulenburg <[email protected]> wrote: ... > The Wikimedia Foundation has recently learned that Sarah has been editing Wikipedia on behalf of paying clients, as recently as a few weeks ago. She did that even though it is widely known that paid editing is frowned upon by many in the editing community and by the Wikimedia Foundation.
Hi Frank, I have no idea how to interpret "paid editing is... *frowned upon*... by the Wikimedia Foundation". Could you please provide a link or a reference for a n approved WMF policy or resolution that makes it clear to employees or contractors of the WMF that they may have their contracts terminated if they take part in paid editing? Can you also make it clear whether all WMF board members, employees and contractors of the WMF are retrospectively required to now publicly declare all past paid editing? I am sure that many of us active in the Wikimedia movement would like toreview a compiled list of open declarations for WMF employees and trustees. In the UK management or board members may have many varied personal opinions and frown upon as much as they like, however to terminate employment and to ensure that resignations are not later subject to claims of constructive dismissal, there must be relevant policies of the organization making it clear what behaviours are acceptable or not. Employment law in the USA is no doubt different, however I find it hard to believe there are not similar requirements on employers. Depending on your answer to this question, I think it sensible for all chapters to review whether similar policies should apply to their employees and contractors and whether their board members should also be required to make public declarations of any past or current paid editing. Thanks, Fae -- [email protected] http://j.mp/faewm _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
