[Foundation-l] Assume Good Faith and Don't Bite Newbees

[Dan Rosenthal]

I'm not an expert in the particular arena, but it would seem that the onus of any requirement on individual accounts lies on the account holder; it would be patently unreasonable to expect a website or service provider to have any method of enforcing that.

For instance, AOL has not the slightest clue how many people utilize a single one of their accounts.  It could be the credit card holder, it could be them plus their children, it could be 100 different people. They have no more restriction on whether individual accounts are needed than we do.

-Dan
On Dec 10, 2009, at 12:21 PM, John M. Sinclair wrote:

> I'm new to this discussion, so I may be inserting at the wrong place and
> time, but I want to suggest that Wikipedia's counsel determine whether
> the Digital Millennium Copyright Act implicitly requires individual
> accounts in order to maintain the Foundation's protections under the
> Act.  I don't know that it does, but I think it may, or may head in that
> direction.
> 
> By the way, and by comparison, the federal courts require individual
> attorney accounts for use of the online filing system (called Pacer), so
> that an individual attorney must take responsibility for her or his
> pleadings, and can't hide behind a firm account.  Of course, you can
> always locate an individual attorney, and determine what firm they work
> for.  
> 
> 
> John Sinclair
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org
> [mailto:foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Geoffrey
> Plourde
> Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 8:15 PM
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Assume Good Faith and Don't Bite Newbees
> 
> The spirit of the one person per account policy was to prevent people
> from disclaiming responsibility by claiming another person did it. I
> feel that allowing accounts for GLAMs would not violate the intent of
> the policy, but suggest that the account be required to verify, maintain
> a valid email and provide the Foundation with the identities of the
> authorized users.   
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Pharos <pharosofalexandria at gmail.com>
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Sent: Wed, December 9, 2009 4:16:54 PM
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Assume Good Faith and Don't Bite Newbees
> 
> I believe that a "verified" account system for GLAMs specifically
> doing encyclopedic work (not for businesses, etc) would not be too
> difficult to work out, and would be well worth any such effort.
> 
> Such systems, though nothing is 100%, have worked quite well for many
> other websites.
> 
> Thanks,
> Pharos
> 
> On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 6:38 AM, Gerard Meijssen
> <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hoi,
>> When they are blocked like it happened with the Tropenmuseum, I will
> ask the
>> person who did this to reconsider... There has to be a reason for a
> block
>> and these organisations do what they do and they do it very well. The
> notion
>> that a block on sight is always good is .... not reasonable.
>> Thanks,
>>    GerardM
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 2009/12/5 John Vandenberg <jayvdb at gmail.com>
>> 
>>> On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 12:13 AM, Gerard Meijssen
>>> <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hoi,
>>>> I want to give you two different group / company accounts that I
> think
>>> are
>>>> valuable..
>>>> 
>>>> Tropenmuseum... If you do not know about it, read the Tropenmuseum
>>> article
>>>> on Commons
>>>> Calcey - a company from Sri Lanka has adopted the localisation of
> the
>>>> Sinhala language. We are really grateful for their work.
>>>> 
>>>> There are more great examples of companies, groups that make a
> difference
>>>> ... I would like to know more good examples..
>>> 
>>> You say that now, but what happens when they are blocked.
>>> 
>>> Or maybe they say something that sounds like a legal threat; are they
>>> speaking for the company?
>>> 
>>> --
>>> John Vandenberg
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l