Let me come back from holidays and I,m with you. I'm already working on a similar issue. Thanks to all.
Dott. Spataro IusOnDemand.com Sviluppo software e formazione diritto del web > Il giorno 09 ago 2017, alle ore 15:33, Michael Stemle > <themanchic...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > > That is fantastic! I started thinking about some stuff last night, and this > seems like it's already very detailed. I'll review it later when I have time > to dig in. It'd be cool if we had something that could tie a score to a > specific clause in a document, too. > >> On Wednesday, August 9, 2017 at 4:53:47 AM UTC-4, Michiel de Jong wrote: >> Awesome! I'm really excited to see this post appear on the list at this time. >> >> As you know we have this concept of a 'team' (see >> https://tosdr.org/about.html#contact), who are basically the list of people >> within our community (including myself) who have more or less committed to >> sometiimes responding to interview requests from the press, and to feeling >> extra guilty about the project's current backlog. :) >> >> We sometimes exchange emails off-list about our personal planning of who >> might be able to do what, and one of those was a discussion about moving our >> crippled editing app (https://edit.tosdr.org) from Meteor to Ruby on Rails, >> in the hope it will be easier to find people who are willing to maintain and >> develop it. We still have about 4600 euros left from the 2011 crowdfunding >> (see https://github.com/tosdr/1901/blob/master/finances/finance-2017-q1.md), >> and are currently rewarding ourselves with 20 euros per hour in the case of >> paid ToS;DR work (so we can still do 230 hours of paid ToS;DR work before we >> need to do a new crowd-funding round). We've repeatedly posted and tweeted >> that we're looking for a Meteor developer who is interested in working >> remotely on an awesome, important, and world-famous project, but no luck yet >> - hopefully it's easier to find this person if we switch to Ruby-on-Rails! :) >> >> Another discussion that's relevant is setting up monthly ToS;DR meeting, and >> I'm now a bit embarrassed that this discussion was initiated and kept in a >> small circle of personal email addresses, instead of sharing it with >> everybody on this mailing list. >> >> Anybody, if you want to join our monthly meeting, please add your name!:) >> https://framadate.org/8azN8C2rfyxdKueo Current leading proposals are next >> week Tuesday or Thursday, EU evening / east-coast afternoon / west-cost >> morning time. >> >> About the scoring system and the checklist, yes, both are things I've been >> playing around with: >> * scoring criteria (I call them 'cases'): >> https://github.com/tosdr/tosdr-build/blob/master/scripts/cases.js >> * assign scores to points based on these cases: >> https://github.com/tosdr/tosdr-build/blob/master/scripts/checkcases.js >> * assign a class based on point scores: >> https://github.com/tosdr/tosdr-build/blob/master/scripts/checkclasses.js >> >> These are all one-off scripts that Ian and I have sometimes run on our own >> laptops, but which you can't really ask random contributors to run, because >> it's just too user-unfriendly, so the idea is that these processes should >> all go into a hosted web app, which is what we hope someone, or someones, >> will develop, but which has been embarrassingly stalled over the past years, >> due to everybody having things like day jobs and other stuff to do... >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> Michiel. >> >> >> >>> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 6:29 PM, Renee Lloyd <renee...@mac.com> wrote: >>> This is a great idea! I'm interested in working with you! >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>>> On Aug 8, 2017, at 11:27 AM, Michael Stemle <theman...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> I know that this is my first message to the group, but I've been watching >>>> for a while and I would like to jump in and help. >>>> >>>> A key challenge that I see this group facing is that the backlog of sites >>>> to score is mammoth. There is no way that this group will ever be able to >>>> keep up with the changes and the scoring of TOS and Privacy Policies if it >>>> is something which takes a long time to do. The backlog is unsustainable, >>>> and because there's no way that the backlog can be chewed into, and so >>>> many popular sites are not yet scored, it will be difficult for the >>>> public—and the organizations themselves—to take scoring seriously. >>>> >>>> Google has a "C." Google doesn't care. DuckDuckGo has an "A," and they >>>> only care because they've made that a core part of their business. >>>> >>>> I would like to help construct a proposal for a standardized scoring >>>> system. This scoring system would focus not on independent clauses in the >>>> document, but rather questions like: "can site X track you outside of your >>>> own site? -20 points" or "does organization Y promise to disclose >>>> government requests for information? +20 points." Something simple, which >>>> when aggregated could output a score. >>>> >>>> I would like to find two or three other people to work with in this >>>> endeavor, the product of which would be a document outlining the process >>>> for measuring, scoring, and preparing this proposal for a vote by >>>> contributors. Since there's a lot to review, I think keeping the number of >>>> people down will help us come to something that we can open to the wider >>>> group more quickly. >>>> >>>> I would like this process to observe a December 1st deadline, so that we >>>> can all review the document and members (of which I am not one yet) can >>>> vote. During the process we would give a monthly update. >>>> >>>> After this process, it might be useful to have a program which takes a >>>> checklist of the criteria, runs it through a rules engine, and pops out a >>>> score. This would make it so that people reviewing sites weren't affecting >>>> the score directly, but instead were focusing first and foremost on the >>>> agreed-upon criteria. >>>> >>>> The goals of this process would be: >>>> A clear, transparent, and easy-to-understand set of scoring criteria that >>>> the browser plugin could draw attention to >>>> Because of the standardized approach, the organizations being scored would >>>> understand how to improve their score >>>> We would now have the ability to score sites consistently, and more quickly >>>> This process will foster a more trustworthy set of scores as it is >>>> repeatable based on criteria >>>> No recommendations would be construed to have been agreed-upon by the >>>> group until a vote affirmed the proposal >>>> I do hope that the group thinks that this is a worthwhile proposal, and >>>> I'm happy to start working on this ASAP. If this is already an effort >>>> which is underway, I would like to contribute. I looked but didn't find >>>> any. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Much thanks. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> [!!] Please see https://edit.tosdr.org -- this is where new contributions >>>> should be submitted and discussed >>>> >>>> tosdr.org | twitter.com/tosdr | github.com/tosdr >>>> --- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>> "Terms of Service; Didn't Read" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>>> email to tosdr+un...@googlegroups.com. >>>> To post to this group, send email to to...@googlegroups.com. >>>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tosdr. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tosdr/b8540c74-3a79-46ac-ab77-eb98ada3d5ef%40googlegroups.com. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >>> -- >>> [!!] Please see https://edit.tosdr.org -- this is where new contributions >>> should be submitted and discussed >>> >>> tosdr.org | twitter.com/tosdr | github.com/tosdr >>> --- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "Terms of Service; Didn't Read" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>> email to tosdr+un...@googlegroups.com. >>> To post to this group, send email to to...@googlegroups.com. >>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tosdr. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tosdr/87571CC0-AF17-4D55-B476-D3945D63D26A%40mac.com. >>> >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- > [!!] Please see https://edit.tosdr.org -- this is where new contributions > should be submitted and discussed > > tosdr.org | twitter.com/tosdr | github.com/tosdr > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Terms of Service; Didn't Read" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to tosdr+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to tosdr@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tosdr. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tosdr/09377cf3-f9d2-4e15-bf75-e648ebe22643%40googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- [!!] Please see https://edit.tosdr.org -- this is where new contributions should be submitted and discussed tosdr.org | twitter.com/tosdr | github.com/tosdr --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Terms of Service; Didn't Read" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tosdr+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to tosdr@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tosdr. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tosdr/C18004B7-AE58-4B9F-9DE7-FF2A15CC7C12%40iusondemand.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
