On 11/04/2011 16:04, Alison M. Wheeler wrote: > ----- "Gordon Joly"<[email protected]> wrote: >>>> All prospective and current Directors of the Company should be >> asked to >>>> reveal Wikipedia and related identities (e.g. Commons) . And >> perhaps all >>>> others (e.g. Twitter). It should be made part of the fabric of the >>>> Company, which should be open and accountable. >> My suggestion is to make it a condition of becoming a Director of the >> >> Company that you would reveal all identities online. Both Wikimedia >> related and others. >> >> Open and accountable. That's the mantra. > Not often writing on this list (though usually reading it) I have to > interject here. > > To *demand* that a candidate details all their WM-related > identities/activities is, as I see it, a completely valid requirement as it > is directly and intimately related to their possible Chapter-related > responsibilities and public accountability. > > To *demand* that they additional detail *all* their other online (and > offline?) identities is not so. We may not have a rigorously defined-in-law > right to privacy in this country but I believe it would be wrong to make this > a *requirement*. By all means someone might wish to release some additional, > ie non-WM, information about their online persona(s) but it would be > intrusive, not to say an invitation to spammers and stalkers, to have to make > additional information public. > > Every individual is entitled to keep their private life exactly that, and > where such online persona(s) are exist and are attributable to that private > life I do not believe voters or other WM-related people have any right to > know about them when they would not have any impact upon their ability to > perform the tasks they are seeing. To give a few examples what about where > someone suffers from depression so has an online identity which they use to > seek mutual support from others? Where they are GBLT but would lose their > employment or family if it were to become public so use an additional persona > online? Where they have a blogging identity which 'whistleblows' on a > business they are associated with (eg police, ambulance, etc) where the same > could happen? > > There are many other use cases for online anonymity too which are completely > valid and would not impact on their ability to work for WMUK or the WM > projects generally. We should not be forcing such capable individuals away; > restricting candidacy to solely those who can make others believe they are > 'squeaky clean' does a disservice to all the possible candidates, and to the > electorate too. > > Alison Wheeler > > _____
Alison, thanks for that. Gordo -- Gordon Joly [email protected] http://www.joly.org.uk/ Don't Leave Space To The Professionals! _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list [email protected] http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
