Re: IETF privacy policy - update

[Martin Rex <[e-mail]>]

jean-michel bernier de portzamparc wrote:
> 
> However, from our own JEDI's (so-labelled "Jefsey's disciples") experience I
> would suggest some kind of "ietf privacy netiquette". It could be equivalen
> to architectural quotes like "dumb network", "end to end", "protocol on the
> wire", "rough consensus", etc. It could be added to the Tao.

+1

The IETF used to be an organization running on respect for the
guidance provide by their leaders.

Policies and their enforcement are means of control for rulers/government
in the absence of respect.


A written down privacy policy does not define what is acceptable,
it can only define what is compliant (with that policy).

"Acceptable" means different things to different people.

Someone suggested we could start with the privacy policy from
Google and work from there, but forgot the Sarcasm tags.

On my scale, Google is a serious and probably the largest privacy
offender world-wide.  example: "Google Street View"


I'm also being a little confused about seeing a solution
(a privacy policy draft) being proposed before there is consent
on what exactly is the problem that should be solved and whether
it is really worth solving.

I might have missed it, but all I remeber about the problem
being stated was "we don't have such a document, but almost everybody
else has one".

But for solving the "lack of paper" problem, a document with a neat title
"IETF Privacy Policy", and a crisp content "We care."
might be equally sufficient.


-Martin