On 6/15/12 14:42 , [email protected] wrote:
> I presume it is the same data that people input into the "Organization" field 
> when they register for the meeting.

I do change mine based on what capacity I'm attending a particular
meeting in. That goes for email address on existing blue sheets as well...

The nice people who send me a check every two weeks don't generally fund
my attendance.

> Regards,
> 
> Ed  J.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Burger <[email protected]>
> Sender: [email protected]
> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 17:37:50 
> To: IETF Chair<[email protected]>
> Cc: IETF<[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: Future Handling of Blue Sheets
> 
> Do we have guidelines as to what is an "organization affiliation"?
> 
> On Jun 14, 2012, at 5:26 PM, IETF Chair wrote:
> 
>> Two things have occurred since the message below as sent to the IETF mail 
>> list.  First, we got a lawyer in Europe to do some investigation, and the 
>> inclusion of the email address on the blue sheet will lead to trouble with 
>> the European privacy laws.  Second, Ted Hardie suggested that we could 
>> require a password to access the scanned blue sheet.
>>
>> Based on the European privacy law information, the use of email will result 
>> in a major burden.  If the email address is used, then we must provide a way 
>> for people to ask for their email address to be remove at any time in the 
>> future, even if we got prior approval to include it.  Therefore, I suggest 
>> that we collect organization affiliation to discriminate between multiple 
>> people with the same name instead of email address.
>>
>> Based on Ted's suggestion, I checked with the Secretariat about using a 
>> datatracker login to download the scanned blue sheet.  This is fairly easy 
>> to do, once the community tracking tools are deployed.  However, with the 
>> removal of the email addresses from the blue sheets, it is unclear that 
>> there is any further need for password protection of these images.  
>> Therefore, I suggest that we proceed without password protection for the 
>> blue sheet images.
>>
>> Here is a summary of the suggested way forward:
>>
>> - Stop collecting email addresses on blue sheets;
>>
>> - Collect organization affiliation to discriminate between multiple people 
>> with the same name;
>>
>> - Scan the blue sheets and include the images in the proceedings for the WG 
>> session;
>>
>> - Add indication to top of the blue sheet so people know it will be part of 
>> the proceedings; and
>>
>> - Discard paper blue sheets after scanning.
>>
>> Russ
>>
>>
>> On May 6, 2012, at 12:46 PM, IETF Chair wrote:
>>
>>> We have heard from many community participants, and consensus is quite 
>>> rough on this topic.  The IESG discussed this thread and reached two 
>>> conclusions:
>>>
>>> (1) Rough consensus: an open and transparent standards process is more 
>>> important to the IETF than privacy of blue sheet information.
>>>
>>> (2) Rough consensus: inclusion of email addresses is a good way to 
>>> distinguish participants with the same or similar names.
>>>
>>>
>>> Based on these conclusions, the plan is to handle blue sheets as follows:
>>>
>>> - Continue to collect email addresses on blue sheets;
>>>
>>> - Scan the blue sheet and include the image in the proceedings for the WG 
>>> session;
>>>
>>> - Add indication to top of the blue sheet so people know it will be part of 
>>> the proceedings; and
>>>
>>> - Discard paper blue sheets after scanning.
>>>
>>>
>>> On behalf of the IESG,
>>> Russ
>>>
>>
> 
> 


Reply via email to