Re: [At-Large] Tracking of our messages - not a privacy violation .. ?
As far as I can tell, this is a completely public list, and an individual (not ICANN staff) has summarized the posts and sends the summary to the list. I don't see what this has to do with staff. Since the lists are open to the public (not limited to list participants, I don't see how this is a privacy issue. Alan At 11/04/2008 12:41 PM, Robert Guerra wrote:
A simple message from staff indicating that statistics were going to be posted for the use of helping us assess the level of engagement would be a good thing to have happened.
Not sure why such a notice wasn't sent.
regards
Robert
On 11-Apr-08, at 12:25 PM, John Levine wrote:
My interest is to - start a discussion on this, and from there see what consensus (if any) emerges on the issue.
Robert, this is silly. The ALAC has a lot of important issues to deal with, but this isn't one of them.
If the full text public archive of this list isn't a problem, it's absurd to claim that a few simple statistics are.
R's, John
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Alan the ExCo specifically asked staff to arrange for the metrics being posted to be posted to this list (as they are on several others)... CLO -----Original Message----- From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg Sent: Saturday, April 12, 2008 3:14 AM To: At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [At-Large] Tracking of our messages - not a privacy violation .. ? As far as I can tell, this is a completely public list, and an individual (not ICANN staff) has summarized the posts and sends the summary to the list. I don't see what this has to do with staff. Since the lists are open to the public (not limited to list participants, I don't see how this is a privacy issue. Alan At 11/04/2008 12:41 PM, Robert Guerra wrote:
A simple message from staff indicating that statistics were going to be posted for the use of helping us assess the level of engagement would be a good thing to have happened.
Not sure why such a notice wasn't sent.
regards
Robert
On 11-Apr-08, at 12:25 PM, John Levine wrote:
My interest is to - start a discussion on this, and from there see what consensus (if any) emerges on the issue.
Robert, this is silly. The ALAC has a lot of important issues to deal with, but this isn't one of them.
If the full text public archive of this list isn't a problem, it's absurd to claim that a few simple statistics are.
R's, John
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.or g
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
participants (2)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr