On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 10:44 PM, Matthew Walker <mwalker@wikimedia.org> wrote:

Nemo, Swalling,

Thanks for the feedback.

I can see where you're going with distilling it down to a generic question -- and I've added that as the first thing in the RfC -- but I'm purposefully not trying to make it totally generic; in my mind the RfC is saying not only is this OK in general, but is the method I'm using OK and are my goals OK. If that's not really how RfCs are written; I guess I need some more in depth guidance on how to improve the page.

you'd probably want to open the actual discussion on the (rather lenghty) document/proposal as [[RfC]] subpage to have slightly more visibility and "formality" (not that Meta RfC are in any way formal).

I absolutely want more feedback and I want to be as open as possible. I'm not entirely sure what you mean here though; specifically "[[RfC]] subpage" doesn't make sense to me. I already am linked on the meta RfC page... If you meant that I should move it to be a subpage under RfC I just did that.

 

~Matt Walker

Wikimedia Foundation

Fundraising Technology Team

Hi Matt,

I'm going to go ahead and leave my personal thoughts in the real RFC comments section. In general, I think you should be asking technical folks on this list about the method, legal (specifically, Stephen Laporte and Luis Villa) about whether it's even allowed according to the privacy policy,