Written scenario · Ethics, Collaboration
The editor behind the username
You are a volunteer editor on a local history wiki.
Your wiki is run by volunteers who value both anonymity and neutrality. One pseudonymous editor, Harbor_Lamp, has rewritten several pages so that a city department looks consistently good, and has removed some critical sources. By chance, you learned outside the wiki who this person probably is: someone who appears to work in that department. You have no proof, and the editor has broken no written rule. You must decide what to do with what you know.
The two questions
- 1What would you do, and why?
- 2When, if ever, should one person's privacy give way to a group's need to stay fair and neutral? How do you decide?
What raters look for
- Ethics
- Weighs competing duties honestly, protects people from harm, and stays accountable to rules and values.
- Collaboration
- Works toward a shared goal, shares credit and load, and repairs friction inside a team.
Answer scenarios like this on the real timers
Answer both questions on the clock, and get each one scored 1–9 the way raters score. Your first set is free, no card.
Practice free
