Jesse Plamondon-Willard wrote:
On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 4:55 AM, Florence Devouard
<Anthere9(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
Your input is welcome. Please note that voting on
this policy is planned
next week-end during the 21st of June board meeting. So, input is
welcome NOW.
While the draft is very good as a supporting explanatory essay, I
don't think it's written as a policy; it's unnecessarily verbose,
reads like an essay or opinion piece, makes incorrect assumptions
(like "everyone can contribute", "history [...] is preserved
indefinitely", or "you are encouraged but not required to register
with your real name" (some wikis specifically discourage that due to
stalking, etc)), significantly addresses non-privacy subjects (like
community values, copyright, or user access hierarchy), and uses
redundant section numbering (sections are numbered automatically in
the table of contents). I think the explanatory material should be
moved to a separate essay, so that the policy only contains policy.
I've drafted a rewritten policy that addresses these and other
concerns (such as undue references to en-Wikipedia) at
<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Draft_Privacy_Policy_June_2008#Rewrite>.
I'd also appreciate input on that rewritten draft.
Hello Pathoschild,
I've dropped input on the rewritten draft.
My main concern with it is that it is rewritten in such a way that
* it only addresses privacy issue on the projects themselves (rather
than on all activities related to the projects, eg, mailing lists, OTRS).
* it totally neglects issues related to special access users (in
particular checkusers etc...)
* it also removes some new decisions recently made by the board (eg,
notification of a user when private data has been released upon legal
request)
I agree that the original document is a bit verbiose and could be
simplified in some parts.
I also agree that part of it is "descriptive" rather than "policy".
However, "simplification" should keep all the meat.
I wonder if it would not be possible to separate this document in two
documents.
* One describing the philosophy and the data kept.
* The other being more policy oriented.
OR
Separating more clearly in the document, points related to "projects"
and points related to other activities (mailing lists, irc, otrs etc...)
Ant