[Foundation-l] [Wikipedia-l] Indefinite block and desysopping by User:Danny

Fri Apr 21 23:32:33 UTC 2006

Roberto Frangi wrote:

>We are talking of two guys that are quite important for Wikimedia. And 
>moreover of two guys that know each other. So, I just don't understand 
>how this could have happened, and why this hasn't been settled in a 
>private way.
>
>  
>
If you review the Wikimedia Foundation's solicitation for public funds 
and the various project mission statements you will find there is nobody 
on this planet that is not quite important for Wikimedia and its projects.

Miscommunication happens all the time in human projects.   The larger 
and more complex a project gets the greater the potential for 
miscommunication.  Wikipedia is arguably the largest most complex 
project ever undertaken in human history or that will ever be undertaken 
in human history.

Knowing each other is not necessarily helpful.  Perhaps the problem is 
not miscommunication but actually disagreement regarding fundamental 
project policy, effective methods, cultural imperatives, national law, 
or international conflict.  Some people do not naturally get along even 
when they share missions, values, or previous agreements or cordiality.

I think Eric is German but I could be mistaken.  As a result of some 
extreme conflict early in the project I do not choose to interact 
privately with the God King, his employees, or influential cabal 
members.  Therefore I do know anything of Eric or Danny other than via  
a few public emails encountered semi randomly.

I think Danny is a Wikimedia Foundation employee and probably resides, 
works and is a U.S. citizen.  I do not know if foundation policy allows 
employees to interact in Wikimedia projects via sockpuppets, 
anonymously, etc.  If one applies the mission statements to the extreme 
then obviously we would not wish to subtract access to Wikimedia 
Foundation employees' knowledge without somehow verifying somone else 
knows what they know regardless of how much it improves operational 
efficiencies or progress towards our stated goals in the short term.

So arguably one can discern a situation might arise where one party 
might be subject to the U.S. Patriot Act while another party is not.   
One might be required by Act of Congress to keep these matters private 
as directed by agents of the U.S. Government allegedly acting in the 
National Interest while a German (or other) national might or might not 
be required by their government or local Patriots, freedom fighters or 
terrorist organizations to comply with arbitrary dictates of U.S. 
officials acting in violoation of their oaths to protect and defend the 
constitution of the United States.

Disregarding the above high level issues let's go back to an easier case 
of a simple conflict between Foundation policy mandated (perhaps 
privately or unilaterally) by the God-King (or his lawyer or a warrant 
from U.S. secret police citing national defense and the U.S. Patriot 
act) and some other community participant.  If the root cause of the 
conflict appears to either party to be fundamental and likely to crop up 
again in the future then one party might prefer to discuss it in public.

If one party has found the other party to be unlikely to engage fairly 
in private discussion (by that party's personal standards or that 
party's interpretation of the published standards of the Wikimedia 
community) then they might prefer a public discussion to bring some 
third party influence and/or accountability into the negotiations or 
discussions.

If you require further complicating factors,  imagineering, or rampant 
speculation to gain insight regarding how this type of situation might 
happen feel free to change the email subject in your reply and we can 
continue this discussion on another thread to avoid confusing the 
specifics of this situation with abstract discussion of human or legal 
factors that might affect public policy at Wikimedia projects.

Incidentally, an easy answer obviously is embodied in the assume good 
faith policy.   This works well to shut up neophytes in initial 
debates.   It does not work so well with experienced community members 
who have a personal or public data base to consult if assuming good 
faith has not worked out well in the past.

Also of possible interest can be comparisons of public and private 
databases.

Regards,
lazyquasar