I’m sorry, but having been involved in dozens of FOIA requests on both sides - I feel like
I have to point out that submitting a FOIA request and then sending this email is like
taking your neighbor to court, and then sending an anonymous letter to the editor
complaining they are no longer inviting you over for tea.
If you truly wanted their friendly cooperation, sending a FOIA request was not the way to
go. However, since you did that, and then sent this email anonymously, my hunch is that
they did not find you to be a person seeking information in good faith - and that you are
well aware that there was no actual reason to expect them to be helpful. It seems very
much like you have a personal ulterior motive, and I imagine they were aware of that.
You are absolutely welcome to submit a FOIA, that is your legal right. However, you do not
have the right to expect the target of your FOIA to be cooperative with or happy about
your legal demand to a third-party for documents about them. Again, I am sorry, but
sending that request and then this email just comes off as an intention to harm and not
inform (as you claim). Since NARA legally is the focus of the FOIA and not WM-DC, I would
not expect them to respond. You are going through a legal route and expecting casual
responses - that just isn’t going to happen.
No doubt, this list has not heard the last of you, but please drop the accusation of WM-DC
being unreasonably uncooperative. I am not sure what all of this is about, but already,
you have come off in a way that I question the motives of your efforts. You do not send a
FOIA request and then expect the other party to be happy about it - that is just not
realistic. You want to stir up shit and make others aware of it - maybe that is necessary,
I do not know - but at least own up to your goals and drop the false pretenses. You might
be on to something important, but right now you are going about it in a way that seems
more likely to make others more wary of you than WM-DC.
-greg (User:Varnent)
A concerned citizen not afraid to post with his name
On Nov 20, 2015, at 11:34 AM, ResearchBiz
<ResearchBiz(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On October 13 (over a month ago), I submitted a Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA) request to the National Archives, with a courtesy copy
addressed to Kirill Lokshin, James Hare, and the Safe Space Committee
affiliated with Wikiconference USA 2015.
I had hoped for Wikimedia DC's help in this matter, because I think
it's very important in resolving the increasing tension that seems to
exist between the First Amendment right of unabridged free speech, vs.
the rising perception that there is a privilege not to ever have one's
feelings hurt by unabridged speech. I spoke today with the NARA
employee who is supervising the response to the FOIA request, and it
sounds like they are assembling quite a substantial amount of
information that will be delivered back to me, likely in the next two
weeks, I am told.
In stark contrast, I have not heard any response from the leaders of
Wikimedia DC, even though their code of ethics asserts that personnel
should:
* Serve with courtesy and responsiveness
* Demonstrate the highest standards of personal
integrity,truthfulness, honesty, and fortitude
* Conduct organizational and operational duties with open communication
It's possible that Lokshin and Hare have not received my request from
October 13, but I doubt that's the case. Time is running out for the
leadership of Wikimedia DC to proactively state their position on the
concerns addressed in the NARA FOIA request.
Sincerely,
A concerned citizen
_______________________________________________
wikimedia-dc mailing list
wikimedia-dc(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-dc