Brian Gupta <brian.gupta@brandorr.com> writes:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
>> Hi Gerald,
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 10:08:22AM -0700, Gerald Turner wrote:
>>> Richard Hartmann <richih.mailinglist@gmail.com> writes:
>>> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Benjamin Kerensa <bkerensa@ubuntu.com> wrote:
>>> >> I would say that there are lots of policies and rules that
>>> >> Debconf attendees need to comply with to travel to the U.S. that
>>> >> they may not agree with. I'm certain their policy is just along
>>> >> the lines of covering them for any possible liability and about
>>> >> appropriate conduct.
>>> >
>>> > WIthout wanting to bikeshed, wouldn't the pragmatic approach be to
>>> > request a copy and go through it instead of making largely
>>> > baseless assumptions?
>>>
>>> Here is Puppet Labs Code of Conduct:
>>>
>>> http://docs.puppetlabs.com/community/community_guidelines.html#event-code-of-conduct
>>>
>>> Yesterday I got a reply from Puppet Labs, looks like they'll accept
>>> an export of our summit data rather than have us use Eventbrite, and
>>> also looks like they agree that our CoC and their CoC are in
>>> alignment ("For the most part, I feel they are in sync").
>>
>> One thing I'm concerned about is whether attendees are going to be
>> upset about disclosing their personal information to Puppet Labs in
>> this way. Of course it's preferable over having to share it with an
>> external third party (event brite), but in that case at least the
>> people choosing to attend the C&W party are in control of what data
>> is shared. What is the overall thinking here about the data we'll
>> export?
>>
>> AIUI, PuppetLabs wants name and email for the people attending (they
>> also want physical address, but we explained this wasn't available
>> and they were ok with it). Should we try to insist on only giving
>> them names, since they have no reason to contact people by email
>> afterwards? They mostly just want a headcount, right?
>
> I personally feel that in this case, that giving the names people
> registered with may be ok, since without email addresses, it's not
> really that "exploitable", nor is it unreasonable to have a list of
> names at the door, to manage headcount. IE: The request makes sense.
>
> I would say that we should perhaps see if we can negotiate some method
> for a few late adds, in the event someone's plans change, and want to
> attend. (Unless it's a capacity issue.) (We'll still tell people it's
> mandatory to RSVP).
>
> That said, without further explanation as to why they want/need email
> addresses, I don't think we should share them. (I can't think of an
> obvious reason that they'd want them, that I'd find agreeable, but I
> may be missing something.)
>
>> Strawman:
>>
>> - add a C&W party sign-up checkbox to the website
>> - include a disclaimer letting people know their name and email will
>> be shared with PuppetLabs as the event host
>> - include a pointer to the CoC
>> - send out a mail to debconf-announce the week of the conference (no
>> earlier!) with sign-up instructions and a stated deadline
>>
>> Is this in line with what other people are expecting here?
Update (good news):
We decided¹ to go with Steve's Strawman idea.
Puppet Labs will accept names-only (no email addresses).
However Puppet Labs needs the export two business days before the event
which would be Thursday August 21st.
¹ http://meetbot.debian.net/debconf-team/2014/debconf-team.2014-07-29-18.58.html
--
Gerald Turner <gturner@unzane.com> Encrypted mail preferred!
OpenPGP: 4096R / CA89 B27A 30FA 66C5 1B80 3858 EC94 2276 FDB8 716D
Attachment:
pgpVgFA26r1LD.pgp
Description: PGP signature