Re: IETF privacy policy - update

[joel jaeggli <[e-mail]>]

On 2010-07-07 12:59, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>
> Do some people not come to IETF meetings because of the current null
> privacy policy?

Do some people not come because attendance is a matter of public record?

> Do they say less than they would have if we had a
> typical non-null policy?

do people not speak or participate, due to the note well, audio 
recording in the meeting rooms or the mailing list policy?

> If either of those two are answered yes,
> would those people contribute better knowing that the IETF had a
> policy but no real way to enforce it other than by apologizing when
> it failed to follow the policy?

practices that result in the retention of pii information seem by in 
large fairly well documented as part of the ietf process (consider 
nomcom for example).

to the extent that there are gaps they appear to be associated with 
secretarial tasks not with the ietf activity itself which by in large 
favors transparency through publication.

> If having a privacy policy, even one where there was no real
> enforcement mechanism, was free, nearly everyone would want it. Given
> that getting such a policy is not free, and will cause cycles to be
> lost from other IETF work, is the tradeoff worth it? At this point, I
> would say "no", but mostly because I don't know of anyone who
> contributes less due to the current null policy.
>
> --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium
> _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list
> [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>