Hi Dario & all, Thanks for that!
RCom review is still confusing to me (and I assume to many). I'm not sure how new researchers find out about the need for it (or even about the meta documentation procedures). I think more information/publicity about this could help. One possible and partial approach would be to have a regular (monthly?) summary of and reminder about RCom review sent to this email list. -Jodi On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 6:52 AM, Dario Taraborelli < [email protected]> wrote:So to briefly answer Pine's questions: > > > - yes, going through RCom review is the standard procedure we expect all > proposals to comply with > - no, a proposal should not be removed from Meta if it hasn't been > reviewed, it should only be flagged as pending review using the WMF-support > template. This also means that Audrey fully complied with the expected > procedure to submit a SR request. > - yes, there are privacy concerns, and this is the reason why we take the > review of data collection/retention/licensing terms in the proposal very > seriously. As these surveys do not fall under the WMF's privacy policy they > are not reviewed by WMF Legal team unless they are considered potentially > abusive. The only privacy terms that apply are those displayed on the > landing page of a survey and our goal is to support best practices in > setting up these terms (for example, by making sure that these terms are > explicitly accepted by the participants before entering the > survey/experiment, particularly in the case of non-academic studies that > are not backed by an explicit IRB approval). >
_______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
