On 22/04/07, Andrew Gray <shimgray(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 21/04/07, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hmm, possibly. I'm trying to work out a way
of doing this that
> wouldn't involve "and after you run the check, edit these five
pages."
> It's got to be automatic in the tool.
Email notification? If the user-who-is-checked is has
an email, they
get an email generated to their address saying so and with a handy
explanation.
This should lead to wild fun.
"Why did you check me?!"
"Can't tell you, sorry."
"This is a privacy violation!"
"Not when I didn't tell anyone."
"YUO ARE A ROUGE CHECKUSeR!!"
"Um, no I'm not. But you can ask these guys to go over it if you're sure I
am."
[ wait a month due to huge ombudsman queue ]
"No really, he's not."
So far this is all striking me as "we must do something, this is
something, therefore we must do this" rather than anything that will
actually be productive.
It's not clear what can be done with the function existing at all that
will meaningfully deal with the apparent fears and problems. Someone
is going to be able to look. It's not just the few devs with database
access because they don't scale.
- d.