Last modified: 2013-11-28 23:57:45 UTC
Please create a private mailing list "wikidata-oversight" for coordination between our recently elected oversighters regarding privacy matters. The initial list admins should be: rschen7754.wiki(at)gmail.com (Rschen7754) ajraddatz(at)gmail.com (Ajraddatz) Thanks in advance.
Leaving this for THO for now but just a comment: For legal reasons (given the sensitivity of the content) please make sure to keep archives off both in the initial setup and later.
I was under the impression that the other such lists (oversight-l on enwiki, oversight-commons) were set up with archiving on - is that not the case?
Archiving where only subscribers can see the content, of course :)
yes archiving publicly would be very bad ;) Sorry for the delay: I know oversight-l is not archived. I do not know for sure about the commons list but, in general, if they get reports or have case discussion there it would be highly preferable for it not to be archived. The main reason is that while the emails will often be archived in the personal accounts of the list subscribers if they are on our servers they are reachable by subpoena and warrants against us. That gives us: 1. More information that could possibly have to be turned over depending on the demands, we limit and fight as much as possible but the best defense is not have as little as possible to turn over. and 2. Significantly more work to do as we go through lists that 'could possibly' have information demanded. In general like to limit anything like that as much as possible, that said I should have perhaps been clearer in my original statement: For legal reasons (generally those above) I would prefer it be turned off/stay off but I'm not forcing it :)
I don't quite get why this is needed.... I mean, the wikidata oversighters already have an oversight-wikidata queue on OTRS. Why do you also need a mailing list? For "coordination"? While there are so little OS requests on wikidata?
Jamesofur: if the English Wikipedia doesn't do it then I suppose that we can do without it too, though we receive requests by OTRS anyway, which is searchable (enwiki too)... Trijnstel: I suppose this isn't the most essential list that is needed for Wikimedia... it's more for convenience, especially since we may have a few more oversighters elected when the newest RFPs close.
Just checking in here (sorry for the delay, I'm out of the country and the internet has been down for the past couple of days) - I'll allow James and Trijnstel to respond before I do anything further with this bug.
(In reply to comment #7) > Just checking in here (sorry for the delay, I'm out of the country and the > internet has been down for the past couple of days) - I'll allow James and > Trijnstel to respond before I do anything further with this bug. My opinion is that a project, when they just got new oversighters, only uses either a mailing list or an OTRS queue. Since they already got an OTRS queue, I don't think a mailing list is necessary anymore (unless the OTRS queue is removed again and then a mailing list is created if they feel might be more useful).
Well, but without the archiving, this is simply a separate mailing address for convenience. This would be used for internal discussion and not for taking requests.
note: No blocker from me, especially if it's a discussion list, mostly just wanted to get my thoughts down trying to limit archiving as much as we can for things like this.
(In reply to comment #4) > I know oversight-l is not archived. I do not know for sure about the commons > list but, in general, if they get reports or have case discussion there it > would be highly preferable for it not to be archived. oversight-commons is currently archived, but the archives are only viewable by subscribers (the current Commons OS team). I can confirm we receive reports there and have case discussions and announcements; I don't remember ever posting OR seeing any non-public information there per https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:OS/H#Communicating_suppressions @James: Try searching your inbox for oversight-commons; you might've been CC'd to some announcements there; Philippe or legal@wm.org have been CC'd there for sure. (In reply to comment #10) note: No blocker from me, especially if it's a discussion list, mostly just wanted to get my thoughts down trying to limit archiving as much as we can for things like this. I think we should disable archiving for oversight-commons, then.
Any progress here?
I'll make it
this is done, both initial managers should have the password in their email
