[Foundation-l] Concerns for Safety

Fri Mar 7 15:06:47 UTC 2008

Dan,
It is a real American attitude that the WMF could be considered liable for
selecting a location like Alexandria. I find it is an utterly reprehensible
and disgusting attitude. Limiting this to Americans only makes this attitude
even worse.

The potential risk has been so well covered that it is unlikely that any
claimant would prevail. They would not be convincing becuse the claimed
risks have been widely published in advance.
Thanks,
    GerardM

On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 3:21 PM, Dan Rosenthal <swatjester at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Mar 7, 2008, at 8:41 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>
> > Hoi,
> > Yes, this has already ad nauseam been discussed. The WMF is doing a
> > comprehensive analysis of the risks.
> >
> > To recap some of the more relevant points:
> >
> >   - Terrorists can strike anywhere
>
> And yet, they strike some places more than others.
> >
> >   - Terrorists strike most effective in the sense of security of
> > people
> >   (that is essential for terrorism to be effective)
>
> And yet, terrorists always prefer to strike soft targets, not hard
> targets.
> >
> >   - A conference takes planning and it takes a long term commitment of
> >   the organisers and the WMF to make a conference happen
>
> Which does not excuse their duty to protect their conference goers.
> >
> >   - Most people agree that the value of Wikimania is in having it in
> >   many places  as this is a really potent method of spreading our
> > message
> Citation needed. This sounds remarkably like your own opinion. Once
> again Gerard, you do not speak for "Most people", you speak for
> yourself only.
>
> >
> >   - In the end like in editing Wikipedia, you are responsible for your
> >   own actions. So when you think the risk is too big, you do not go.
>
> This is the real world Gerard, not Wikipedia.  While we are
> responsible for our own actions, we are responsible for other people's
> actions. If the foundation puts people at risk, they open themselves
> up to a lawsuit. The Egyptian government is responsible for protecting
> people, including attendees, in Alexandria. Moreover, we have a duty
> as humans to speak up when we feel others are in danger. So when you
> think the risk is too big, you say something, and try to adjust the
> risk, not simply sit back and not go while others are subjected to
> that unreasonable risk.
>
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >    GerardM
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Tolman <tolmant at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> It's not only the problem about LGBT issues.
> >> There is also the risk (small, indeed... but maybe not non-existent)
> >> related to
> >> fundamentalism positions or violent reactions against WM about the
> >> notable
> >> "pictures of Muhammad" issue, or some other "religious-sensibile
> >> issues".
> >> A sound security assessment in advance, related to these types of
> >> "risks",
> >> would
> >> be useful.
> >> For these types of assessments, I could suggest Control Risk Group:
> >> http://www.control-risks.com/default.aspx
> >>
> >> T.
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
>