On 24 Jul 2019, 04:57 -0500, Daniel Comnea <comnea.d...@gmail.com>, wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All i'm trying to say with the above is: > > > > > > > > > > Should we go with IRC as a form of communication we should then be > > > > > ready to have bodies lined up to: > > > > > > > > > > • look after and admin the IRC channels. > > > > > • enable the IRC log channels and also filter out the noise to be > > > > > consumable (not just stream the logs somewhere and tick the box) > > > > > > > > > > > Easy enough. It’s been done time and again. Let’s give it a whirl. Since > > > I’m the one complaining perhaps I can put my name in for consideration. > > > > > [DC]: i understood not everyone is okay with logging any activity due to > > GDPR so i think this goes off the table
GDPR has very little to do with this and can be easily mitigated. Your communication on IRC is logged via handles and IP addresses, and the right to be forgotten only applies to personal identifiable information and is not absolute. As for the public domain, when someone enters a public channel, there can be an explicit statement they consent to their information they have provided entering the public domain. Their continuing use of the channel implies they consent. If someone want’s the handle, let’s say an email address scrubbed, then so be it. Otherwise, there’s nothing of interest. But, yet again, if they used the channel with explicit notification, their use is consent. Using GDPR as an excuse is fear mongering by people who don’t understand it. Justin Cook > > > > > > > > > >
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@lists.openshift.redhat.com http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/dev
