Re: Minutes of the Foundation Board, 22nd May

[mcatanzaro]

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Benjamin Berg 
 wrote:

Will you make such an offer? If not, is there any reason to not make
this offer in the future and in this case?

Benjamin


There is a good reason not to allow this: it would be sabotague of 
project history. In a small case, it might be harmless, but if it's a 
core developer, imagine the potential damage to GNOME if hundreds or 
thousands of comments were to disappear from bug reports.


I hope GitLab has a time limit as to how far back posts can be edited, 
to prevent this.


Michael

___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Minutes of the Foundation Board, 22nd May

[Alexandre Franke]

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 9:32 PM, Carlos Soriano  wrote:
> What is your goal exactly with this interrogatory?

I guess he’s just trying to get an answer to his initial question,
since you kept dodging it.

-- 
Alexandre Franke
GNOME Hacker & Foundation Director
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Minutes of the Foundation Board, 22nd May

[Carlos Soriano]

What is your goal exactly with this interrogatory?

In this case, the request was explicitly delete the account. The user sent
a screenshot of the admin interface with the button selected of "delete
account and activity" and didn't want anything else.

On 25 May 2018 at 21:30, Benjamin Berg  wrote:

> On Fri, 2018-05-25 at 21:29 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote:
> > Depends on the case I guess? If I have to go over 1000 comments
> > probably not. There could be other reasons, but I don't know yet
> > because I didn't manage many cases yet.
>
> And in this particular case?
>
> Benjamin
>
> > On 25 May 2018 at 21:24, Benjamin Berg 
> > wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2018-05-25 at 21:20 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote:
> > > > Have you done so, if not, is there any reason to not make this
> > > offer?
> > > >
> > > > No, apart of the policy mentioned in the minutes.
> > >
> > > Will you make such an offer? If not, is there any reason to not
> > > make
> > > this offer in the future and in this case?
> > >
> > > Benjamin
> > >
> > > > On 25 May 2018 at 21:18, Benjamin Berg  > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, 2018-05-25 at 21:05 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote:
> > > > > > Benjamin, I couldn't do in the way you mention simply because
> > > > > that
> > > > > > was not the request. The request was as described "account
> > > > > deletion
> > > > > > in GitLab for a blocked user". The request was for complete
> > > > > deletion,
> > > > > > including any activity.
> > > > >
> > > > > This doesn't make any sense to me. The user has explicitly
> > > > > requested a
> > > > > full deletion including all comments. You have solely decided
> > > that
> > > > > the
> > > > > comments would not be removed, but there was no decision on
> > > whether
> > > > > the
> > > > > comment text needs to stay as is.
> > > > >
> > > > > As such, I would expect that you explicitly offer the user to
> > > > > replace
> > > > > all text in relevant posts. Have you done so, if not, is there
> > > any
> > > > > reason to not make this offer?
> > > > >
> > > > > Benjamin
> > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri., 25 May 2018, 20:30 Benjamin Berg,  > > ions
> > > > > .net
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, 2018-05-23 at 12:29 +0100, Allan Day wrote:
> > > > > > > >  * Request for account deletion in GitLab for a blocked
> > > user
> > > > > > > (Carlos)
> > > > > > > >   * Carlos sent an email to board-list with details of
> > > this
> > > > > > > >   * Carlos is the only GitLab admin. He recently blocked
> > > a
> > > > > user
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > inappropriate behaviour. This means that the user can no
> > > > > longer
> > > > > > > log in
> > > > > > > > to edit/delete their comments.
> > > > > > > >   * The user has subsequently sent a mail demanding that
> > > > > their
> > > > > > > posts
> > > > > > > > be deleted. The user has made the case that this is their
> > > > > legal
> > > > > > > right
> > > > > > > > (under Canadian law) and has threatened legal action.
> > > > > > > >   * Comments can only be deleted by an admin.
> > > > > > > >   * We have a prescedent that we don't delete posts that
> > > are
> > > > > > > stored on
> > > > > > > > GNOME servers.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There is a fundamental difference with Gitlab compared to
> > > other
> > > > > > > services though. On Gitlab comments and bug reports can be
> > > > > > > retrospectively modified by the submitter and even third
> > > > > parties in
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > case of bug descriptions. So the user could delete the
> > > relevant
> > > > > > > text
> > > > > > > even if they cannot delete the comment itself.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It sounds like the request for deletion was completely
> > > refused
> > > > > > > rather
> > > > > > > than complying with it as much as possible by changing all
> > > text
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > e.g.
> > > > > > > "comment has been deleted". Is there a reason for not
> > > complying
> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > the request in this way?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >   * Allan - why don't we delete posts? Rosanna - data
> > > > > retention
> > > > > > > > policies are part of our staff handbook, and are required
> > > for
> > > > > > > > insurance purposes.
> > > > > > > >   * Didier - on gnome-fr forums, they offer to anonymise
> > > > > posts
> > > > > > > rather
> > > > > > > > than deleting them (in order to preserve threads). Cosimo
> > > -
> > > > > isn't
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > what happens when a user account is deleted? Yes.
> > > > > > > >   * Cosimo - prefers that people can remove their account
> > > > > rather
> > > > > > > than
> > > > > > > > deleting posts. Didier agrees with this. Allan is
> > > personally
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > favour
> > > > > > > > but doesn't know what the legal requirements are.
> > > > > > > >   * ACTION: 

Anonymous donor pledges $1M over two years

[Neil McGovern]

Hi all,

An anonymous donor has pledged to donate up to $1,000,000 over the next
two years, some of which will be matching funds. I'm grateful for this
donation and we plan on using these funds to increase staff to
streamline operations and to grow support of the GNOME Project and the
surrounding ecosystem.

While we have maintained our position as a proponent of the GNOME
Project, growth has been limited. With these funds, the Foundation will
be able to expand and lead in the free software space.

Details about the donation and the areas of investment will be
announced individually in the coming weeks.

Thanks,
Neil
-- 
Neil McGovern
Executive Director, The GNOME Foundation
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Minutes of the Foundation Board, 22nd May

[Benjamin Berg]

On Fri, 2018-05-25 at 21:29 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote:
> Depends on the case I guess? If I have to go over 1000 comments
> probably not. There could be other reasons, but I don't know yet
> because I didn't manage many cases yet.

And in this particular case?

Benjamin

> On 25 May 2018 at 21:24, Benjamin Berg 
> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2018-05-25 at 21:20 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote:
> > > Have you done so, if not, is there any reason to not make this
> > offer?
> > > 
> > > No, apart of the policy mentioned in the minutes.
> > 
> > Will you make such an offer? If not, is there any reason to not
> > make
> > this offer in the future and in this case?
> > 
> > Benjamin
> > 
> > > On 25 May 2018 at 21:18, Benjamin Berg  > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > On Fri, 2018-05-25 at 21:05 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote:
> > > > > Benjamin, I couldn't do in the way you mention simply because
> > > > that
> > > > > was not the request. The request was as described "account
> > > > deletion
> > > > > in GitLab for a blocked user". The request was for complete
> > > > deletion,
> > > > > including any activity.
> > > > 
> > > > This doesn't make any sense to me. The user has explicitly
> > > > requested a
> > > > full deletion including all comments. You have solely decided
> > that
> > > > the
> > > > comments would not be removed, but there was no decision on
> > whether
> > > > the
> > > > comment text needs to stay as is.
> > > > 
> > > > As such, I would expect that you explicitly offer the user to
> > > > replace
> > > > all text in relevant posts. Have you done so, if not, is there
> > any
> > > > reason to not make this offer?
> > > > 
> > > > Benjamin
> > > > 
> > > > > Cheers
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Fri., 25 May 2018, 20:30 Benjamin Berg,  > ions
> > > > .net
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, 2018-05-23 at 12:29 +0100, Allan Day wrote:
> > > > > > >  * Request for account deletion in GitLab for a blocked
> > user
> > > > > > (Carlos)
> > > > > > >   * Carlos sent an email to board-list with details of
> > this
> > > > > > >   * Carlos is the only GitLab admin. He recently blocked
> > a
> > > > user
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > inappropriate behaviour. This means that the user can no
> > > > longer
> > > > > > log in
> > > > > > > to edit/delete their comments.
> > > > > > >   * The user has subsequently sent a mail demanding that
> > > > their
> > > > > > posts
> > > > > > > be deleted. The user has made the case that this is their
> > > > legal
> > > > > > right
> > > > > > > (under Canadian law) and has threatened legal action.
> > > > > > >   * Comments can only be deleted by an admin.
> > > > > > >   * We have a prescedent that we don't delete posts that
> > are
> > > > > > stored on
> > > > > > > GNOME servers.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > There is a fundamental difference with Gitlab compared to
> > other
> > > > > > services though. On Gitlab comments and bug reports can be
> > > > > > retrospectively modified by the submitter and even third
> > > > parties in
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > case of bug descriptions. So the user could delete the
> > relevant
> > > > > > text
> > > > > > even if they cannot delete the comment itself.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > It sounds like the request for deletion was completely
> > refused
> > > > > > rather
> > > > > > than complying with it as much as possible by changing all
> > text
> > > > to
> > > > > > e.g.
> > > > > > "comment has been deleted". Is there a reason for not
> > complying
> > > > > > with
> > > > > > the request in this way?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > >   * Allan - why don't we delete posts? Rosanna - data
> > > > retention
> > > > > > > policies are part of our staff handbook, and are required
> > for
> > > > > > > insurance purposes.
> > > > > > >   * Didier - on gnome-fr forums, they offer to anonymise
> > > > posts
> > > > > > rather
> > > > > > > than deleting them (in order to preserve threads). Cosimo
> > -
> > > > isn't
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > what happens when a user account is deleted? Yes.
> > > > > > >   * Cosimo - prefers that people can remove their account
> > > > rather
> > > > > > than
> > > > > > > deleting posts. Didier agrees with this. Allan is
> > personally
> > > > in
> > > > > > favour
> > > > > > > but doesn't know what the legal requirements are.
> > > > > > >   * ACTION: Carlos to offer to delete the account and
> > > > anonymise
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > posts in the process.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Benjamin___
> > > > > > foundation-list mailing list
> > > > > > foundation-list@gnome.org
> > > > > > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
> > > 
> > >
> 
> 

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org

Re: Minutes of the Foundation Board, 22nd May

[Carlos Soriano]

Depends on the case I guess? If I have to go over 1000 comments probably
not. There could be other reasons, but I don't know yet because I didn't
manage many cases yet.

On 25 May 2018 at 21:24, Benjamin Berg  wrote:

> On Fri, 2018-05-25 at 21:20 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote:
> > Have you done so, if not, is there any reason to not make this offer?
> >
> > No, apart of the policy mentioned in the minutes.
>
> Will you make such an offer? If not, is there any reason to not make
> this offer in the future and in this case?
>
> Benjamin
>
> > On 25 May 2018 at 21:18, Benjamin Berg 
> > wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Fri, 2018-05-25 at 21:05 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote:
> > > > Benjamin, I couldn't do in the way you mention simply because
> > > that
> > > > was not the request. The request was as described "account
> > > deletion
> > > > in GitLab for a blocked user". The request was for complete
> > > deletion,
> > > > including any activity.
> > >
> > > This doesn't make any sense to me. The user has explicitly
> > > requested a
> > > full deletion including all comments. You have solely decided that
> > > the
> > > comments would not be removed, but there was no decision on whether
> > > the
> > > comment text needs to stay as is.
> > >
> > > As such, I would expect that you explicitly offer the user to
> > > replace
> > > all text in relevant posts. Have you done so, if not, is there any
> > > reason to not make this offer?
> > >
> > > Benjamin
> > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > >
> > > > On Fri., 25 May 2018, 20:30 Benjamin Berg,  > > .net
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 2018-05-23 at 12:29 +0100, Allan Day wrote:
> > > > > >  * Request for account deletion in GitLab for a blocked user
> > > > > (Carlos)
> > > > > >   * Carlos sent an email to board-list with details of this
> > > > > >   * Carlos is the only GitLab admin. He recently blocked a
> > > user
> > > > > for
> > > > > > inappropriate behaviour. This means that the user can no
> > > longer
> > > > > log in
> > > > > > to edit/delete their comments.
> > > > > >   * The user has subsequently sent a mail demanding that
> > > their
> > > > > posts
> > > > > > be deleted. The user has made the case that this is their
> > > legal
> > > > > right
> > > > > > (under Canadian law) and has threatened legal action.
> > > > > >   * Comments can only be deleted by an admin.
> > > > > >   * We have a prescedent that we don't delete posts that are
> > > > > stored on
> > > > > > GNOME servers.
> > > > >
> > > > > There is a fundamental difference with Gitlab compared to other
> > > > > services though. On Gitlab comments and bug reports can be
> > > > > retrospectively modified by the submitter and even third
> > > parties in
> > > > > the
> > > > > case of bug descriptions. So the user could delete the relevant
> > > > > text
> > > > > even if they cannot delete the comment itself.
> > > > >
> > > > > It sounds like the request for deletion was completely refused
> > > > > rather
> > > > > than complying with it as much as possible by changing all text
> > > to
> > > > > e.g.
> > > > > "comment has been deleted". Is there a reason for not complying
> > > > > with
> > > > > the request in this way?
> > > > >
> > > > > >   * Allan - why don't we delete posts? Rosanna - data
> > > retention
> > > > > > policies are part of our staff handbook, and are required for
> > > > > > insurance purposes.
> > > > > >   * Didier - on gnome-fr forums, they offer to anonymise
> > > posts
> > > > > rather
> > > > > > than deleting them (in order to preserve threads). Cosimo -
> > > isn't
> > > > > that
> > > > > > what happens when a user account is deleted? Yes.
> > > > > >   * Cosimo - prefers that people can remove their account
> > > rather
> > > > > than
> > > > > > deleting posts. Didier agrees with this. Allan is personally
> > > in
> > > > > favour
> > > > > > but doesn't know what the legal requirements are.
> > > > > >   * ACTION: Carlos to offer to delete the account and
> > > anonymise
> > > > > the
> > > > > > posts in the process.
> > > > >
> > > > > Benjamin___
> > > > > foundation-list mailing list
> > > > > foundation-list@gnome.org
> > > > > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
> >
> >
>
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Minutes of the Foundation Board, 22nd May

[Benjamin Berg]

On Fri, 2018-05-25 at 21:20 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote:
> Have you done so, if not, is there any reason to not make this offer?
> 
> No, apart of the policy mentioned in the minutes.

Will you make such an offer? If not, is there any reason to not make
this offer in the future and in this case?

Benjamin

> On 25 May 2018 at 21:18, Benjamin Berg 
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Fri, 2018-05-25 at 21:05 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote:
> > > Benjamin, I couldn't do in the way you mention simply because
> > that
> > > was not the request. The request was as described "account
> > deletion
> > > in GitLab for a blocked user". The request was for complete
> > deletion,
> > > including any activity.
> > 
> > This doesn't make any sense to me. The user has explicitly
> > requested a
> > full deletion including all comments. You have solely decided that
> > the
> > comments would not be removed, but there was no decision on whether
> > the
> > comment text needs to stay as is.
> > 
> > As such, I would expect that you explicitly offer the user to
> > replace
> > all text in relevant posts. Have you done so, if not, is there any
> > reason to not make this offer?
> > 
> > Benjamin
> > 
> > > Cheers
> > > 
> > > On Fri., 25 May 2018, 20:30 Benjamin Berg,  > .net
> > > > wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2018-05-23 at 12:29 +0100, Allan Day wrote:
> > > > >  * Request for account deletion in GitLab for a blocked user
> > > > (Carlos)
> > > > >   * Carlos sent an email to board-list with details of this
> > > > >   * Carlos is the only GitLab admin. He recently blocked a
> > user
> > > > for
> > > > > inappropriate behaviour. This means that the user can no
> > longer
> > > > log in
> > > > > to edit/delete their comments.
> > > > >   * The user has subsequently sent a mail demanding that
> > their
> > > > posts
> > > > > be deleted. The user has made the case that this is their
> > legal
> > > > right
> > > > > (under Canadian law) and has threatened legal action.
> > > > >   * Comments can only be deleted by an admin.
> > > > >   * We have a prescedent that we don't delete posts that are
> > > > stored on
> > > > > GNOME servers.
> > > > 
> > > > There is a fundamental difference with Gitlab compared to other
> > > > services though. On Gitlab comments and bug reports can be
> > > > retrospectively modified by the submitter and even third
> > parties in
> > > > the
> > > > case of bug descriptions. So the user could delete the relevant
> > > > text
> > > > even if they cannot delete the comment itself.
> > > > 
> > > > It sounds like the request for deletion was completely refused
> > > > rather
> > > > than complying with it as much as possible by changing all text
> > to
> > > > e.g.
> > > > "comment has been deleted". Is there a reason for not complying
> > > > with
> > > > the request in this way?
> > > > 
> > > > >   * Allan - why don't we delete posts? Rosanna - data
> > retention
> > > > > policies are part of our staff handbook, and are required for
> > > > > insurance purposes.
> > > > >   * Didier - on gnome-fr forums, they offer to anonymise
> > posts
> > > > rather
> > > > > than deleting them (in order to preserve threads). Cosimo -
> > isn't
> > > > that
> > > > > what happens when a user account is deleted? Yes.
> > > > >   * Cosimo - prefers that people can remove their account
> > rather
> > > > than
> > > > > deleting posts. Didier agrees with this. Allan is personally
> > in
> > > > favour
> > > > > but doesn't know what the legal requirements are.
> > > > >   * ACTION: Carlos to offer to delete the account and
> > anonymise
> > > > the
> > > > > posts in the process.
> > > > 
> > > > Benjamin___
> > > > foundation-list mailing list
> > > > foundation-list@gnome.org
> > > > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
> 
> 

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Minutes of the Foundation Board, 22nd May

[Carlos Soriano]

Have you done so, if not, is there any reason to not make this offer?
No, apart of the policy mentioned in the minutes.

On 25 May 2018 at 21:18, Benjamin Berg  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 2018-05-25 at 21:05 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote:
> > Benjamin, I couldn't do in the way you mention simply because that
> > was not the request. The request was as described "account deletion
> > in GitLab for a blocked user". The request was for complete deletion,
> > including any activity.
>
> This doesn't make any sense to me. The user has explicitly requested a
> full deletion including all comments. You have solely decided that the
> comments would not be removed, but there was no decision on whether the
> comment text needs to stay as is.
>
> As such, I would expect that you explicitly offer the user to replace
> all text in relevant posts. Have you done so, if not, is there any
> reason to not make this offer?
>
> Benjamin
>
> > Cheers
> >
> > On Fri., 25 May 2018, 20:30 Benjamin Berg,  > > wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2018-05-23 at 12:29 +0100, Allan Day wrote:
> > > >  * Request for account deletion in GitLab for a blocked user
> > > (Carlos)
> > > >   * Carlos sent an email to board-list with details of this
> > > >   * Carlos is the only GitLab admin. He recently blocked a user
> > > for
> > > > inappropriate behaviour. This means that the user can no longer
> > > log in
> > > > to edit/delete their comments.
> > > >   * The user has subsequently sent a mail demanding that their
> > > posts
> > > > be deleted. The user has made the case that this is their legal
> > > right
> > > > (under Canadian law) and has threatened legal action.
> > > >   * Comments can only be deleted by an admin.
> > > >   * We have a prescedent that we don't delete posts that are
> > > stored on
> > > > GNOME servers.
> > >
> > > There is a fundamental difference with Gitlab compared to other
> > > services though. On Gitlab comments and bug reports can be
> > > retrospectively modified by the submitter and even third parties in
> > > the
> > > case of bug descriptions. So the user could delete the relevant
> > > text
> > > even if they cannot delete the comment itself.
> > >
> > > It sounds like the request for deletion was completely refused
> > > rather
> > > than complying with it as much as possible by changing all text to
> > > e.g.
> > > "comment has been deleted". Is there a reason for not complying
> > > with
> > > the request in this way?
> > >
> > > >   * Allan - why don't we delete posts? Rosanna - data retention
> > > > policies are part of our staff handbook, and are required for
> > > > insurance purposes.
> > > >   * Didier - on gnome-fr forums, they offer to anonymise posts
> > > rather
> > > > than deleting them (in order to preserve threads). Cosimo - isn't
> > > that
> > > > what happens when a user account is deleted? Yes.
> > > >   * Cosimo - prefers that people can remove their account rather
> > > than
> > > > deleting posts. Didier agrees with this. Allan is personally in
> > > favour
> > > > but doesn't know what the legal requirements are.
> > > >   * ACTION: Carlos to offer to delete the account and anonymise
> > > the
> > > > posts in the process.
> > >
> > > Benjamin___
> > > foundation-list mailing list
> > > foundation-list@gnome.org
> > > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
>
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Minutes of the Foundation Board, 22nd May

[Benjamin Berg]

Hi,

On Fri, 2018-05-25 at 21:05 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote:
> Benjamin, I couldn't do in the way you mention simply because that
> was not the request. The request was as described "account deletion
> in GitLab for a blocked user". The request was for complete deletion,
> including any activity.

This doesn't make any sense to me. The user has explicitly requested a
full deletion including all comments. You have solely decided that the
comments would not be removed, but there was no decision on whether the
comment text needs to stay as is.

As such, I would expect that you explicitly offer the user to replace
all text in relevant posts. Have you done so, if not, is there any
reason to not make this offer?

Benjamin

> Cheers
> 
> On Fri., 25 May 2018, 20:30 Benjamin Berg,  > wrote:
> > On Wed, 2018-05-23 at 12:29 +0100, Allan Day wrote:
> > >  * Request for account deletion in GitLab for a blocked user
> > (Carlos)
> > >   * Carlos sent an email to board-list with details of this
> > >   * Carlos is the only GitLab admin. He recently blocked a user
> > for
> > > inappropriate behaviour. This means that the user can no longer
> > log in
> > > to edit/delete their comments.
> > >   * The user has subsequently sent a mail demanding that their
> > posts
> > > be deleted. The user has made the case that this is their legal
> > right
> > > (under Canadian law) and has threatened legal action.
> > >   * Comments can only be deleted by an admin.
> > >   * We have a prescedent that we don't delete posts that are
> > stored on
> > > GNOME servers.
> > 
> > There is a fundamental difference with Gitlab compared to other
> > services though. On Gitlab comments and bug reports can be
> > retrospectively modified by the submitter and even third parties in
> > the
> > case of bug descriptions. So the user could delete the relevant
> > text
> > even if they cannot delete the comment itself.
> > 
> > It sounds like the request for deletion was completely refused
> > rather
> > than complying with it as much as possible by changing all text to
> > e.g.
> > "comment has been deleted". Is there a reason for not complying
> > with
> > the request in this way?
> > 
> > >   * Allan - why don't we delete posts? Rosanna - data retention
> > > policies are part of our staff handbook, and are required for
> > > insurance purposes.
> > >   * Didier - on gnome-fr forums, they offer to anonymise posts
> > rather
> > > than deleting them (in order to preserve threads). Cosimo - isn't
> > that
> > > what happens when a user account is deleted? Yes.
> > >   * Cosimo - prefers that people can remove their account rather
> > than
> > > deleting posts. Didier agrees with this. Allan is personally in
> > favour
> > > but doesn't know what the legal requirements are.
> > >   * ACTION: Carlos to offer to delete the account and anonymise
> > the
> > > posts in the process.
> > 
> > Benjamin___
> > foundation-list mailing list
> > foundation-list@gnome.org
> > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Minutes of the Foundation Board, 22nd May

[Carlos Soriano]

Hi all,

Tobias, I'm not sure I would like to publicly post it here, as I don't
think it's a good idea to target a specific user, even if it was blocked.
In any case, unfortunately the GitLab UI tricked me in this one, and didn't
move it to the "ghost user" as the board suggested, but rather deleted
everything.

Benjamin, I couldn't do in the way you mention simply because that was not
the request. The request was as described "account deletion in GitLab for a
blocked user". The request was for complete deletion, including any
activity.

Cheers

On Fri., 25 May 2018, 20:30 Benjamin Berg, 
wrote:

> On Wed, 2018-05-23 at 12:29 +0100, Allan Day wrote:
> >  * Request for account deletion in GitLab for a blocked user (Carlos)
> >   * Carlos sent an email to board-list with details of this
> >   * Carlos is the only GitLab admin. He recently blocked a user for
> > inappropriate behaviour. This means that the user can no longer log in
> > to edit/delete their comments.
> >   * The user has subsequently sent a mail demanding that their posts
> > be deleted. The user has made the case that this is their legal right
> > (under Canadian law) and has threatened legal action.
> >   * Comments can only be deleted by an admin.
> >   * We have a prescedent that we don't delete posts that are stored on
> > GNOME servers.
>
> There is a fundamental difference with Gitlab compared to other
> services though. On Gitlab comments and bug reports can be
> retrospectively modified by the submitter and even third parties in the
> case of bug descriptions. So the user could delete the relevant text
> even if they cannot delete the comment itself.
>
> It sounds like the request for deletion was completely refused rather
> than complying with it as much as possible by changing all text to e.g.
> "comment has been deleted". Is there a reason for not complying with
> the request in this way?
>
> >   * Allan - why don't we delete posts? Rosanna - data retention
> > policies are part of our staff handbook, and are required for
> > insurance purposes.
> >   * Didier - on gnome-fr forums, they offer to anonymise posts rather
> > than deleting them (in order to preserve threads). Cosimo - isn't that
> > what happens when a user account is deleted? Yes.
> >   * Cosimo - prefers that people can remove their account rather than
> > deleting posts. Didier agrees with this. Allan is personally in favour
> > but doesn't know what the legal requirements are.
> >   * ACTION: Carlos to offer to delete the account and anonymise the
> > posts in the process.
>
> Benjamin___
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list@gnome.org
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
>
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Minutes of the Foundation Board, 22nd May

[Benjamin Berg]

On Wed, 2018-05-23 at 12:29 +0100, Allan Day wrote:
>  * Request for account deletion in GitLab for a blocked user (Carlos)
>   * Carlos sent an email to board-list with details of this
>   * Carlos is the only GitLab admin. He recently blocked a user for
> inappropriate behaviour. This means that the user can no longer log in
> to edit/delete their comments.
>   * The user has subsequently sent a mail demanding that their posts
> be deleted. The user has made the case that this is their legal right
> (under Canadian law) and has threatened legal action.
>   * Comments can only be deleted by an admin.
>   * We have a prescedent that we don't delete posts that are stored on
> GNOME servers.

There is a fundamental difference with Gitlab compared to other
services though. On Gitlab comments and bug reports can be
retrospectively modified by the submitter and even third parties in the
case of bug descriptions. So the user could delete the relevant text
even if they cannot delete the comment itself.

It sounds like the request for deletion was completely refused rather
than complying with it as much as possible by changing all text to e.g.
"comment has been deleted". Is there a reason for not complying with
the request in this way?

>   * Allan - why don't we delete posts? Rosanna - data retention
> policies are part of our staff handbook, and are required for
> insurance purposes.
>   * Didier - on gnome-fr forums, they offer to anonymise posts rather
> than deleting them (in order to preserve threads). Cosimo - isn't that
> what happens when a user account is deleted? Yes.
>   * Cosimo - prefers that people can remove their account rather than
> deleting posts. Didier agrees with this. Allan is personally in favour
> but doesn't know what the legal requirements are.
>   * ACTION: Carlos to offer to delete the account and anonymise the
> posts in the process.

Benjamin

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Minutes of the Foundation Board, 22nd May

[Tobias Mueller]

Hi,

On Wed, 2018-05-23 at 12:29 +0100, Allan Day wrote:
>  * Request for account deletion in GitLab for a blocked user (Carlos)
>   * Carlos sent an email to board-list with details of this
>   * Carlos is the only GitLab admin. He recently blocked a user for
> inappropriate behaviour.
Thanks for keeping our environment a little sane.
Out of curiosity: Which bug is this about?

>   * We have a prescedent that we don't delete posts that are stored on
> GNOME servers.
Sure. But we also have precedent for removing mails from archives ;-)
And we do block access to certain bugzilla comments.

FTR: I'm generally not a big fan of filtering information, but I
appreciate that it's better in some cases to not publicly show certain
things.

Cheers,
  Tobi
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Reminder - Submit your talk - GNOME.Asia summit 2018 - deadline 2018/5/25

[Max]

Hi ALL

Just reminder, please submit you talk TODAY ( LAST DAY )

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 8:07 PM, Max  wrote:

> Hi ALL
>
> Just reminder, please submit your talk before 5/25. ( Just in 3 days )
>
> Please submit yours at: https://docs.google.com/fo
> rms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfKnffsc_Ke2ZEP3fInJkAwEzXFUM24HZ7dYYluoGLmHMQjZw/viewform
>
>
> A standard session will be scheduled for 45 mins (35 mins talk + 10 mins
> Q). The session could be a technical talk, panel discussion, or BOF. If
> you need more time or additional resources, feel free to get in touch with
> the organizing team.
>
> You could see more detail here
>
> https://www.gnome.org/news/2018/04/gnome-asia-summit-2018-
> call-for-papers-is-now-open/
>
>
> GNOME.Asia team
>
>
> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 8:54 AM, Max  wrote:
>
>> Hi ALL
>>
>> Just reminder, please submit your talk before 5/25. ( Just in 7 days )
>>
>> Please submit yours at: https://docs.google.com/fo
>> rms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfKnffsc_Ke2ZEP3fInJkAwEzXFUM24HZ7dYYluoGLmHMQjZw/viewform
>>
>>
>> A standard session will be scheduled for 45 mins (35 mins talk + 10 mins
>> Q). The session could be a technical talk, panel discussion, or BOF. If
>> you need more time or additional resources, feel free to get in touch with
>> the organizing team.
>>
>> You could see more detail here
>>
>> https://www.gnome.org/news/2018/04/gnome-asia-summit-2018-
>> call-for-papers-is-now-open/
>>
>>
>> GNOME.Asia team
>>
>>
>
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list