On 4/22/12 22:12 , Tobias Gondrom wrote: > Hi Russ, > > thank you for the information. > In this case, my preference would be not to publish the blue sheets with > the proceedings. > > Reasoning: > The blue sheet data can at some point be used to determine movement > profiles of individual attendees at the meeting to a finer granularity > than today and therefore can be an issue for privacy (even though I > recognize that this is a public meeting). The fact that we "may reduce" > the amount of subpoenas is a viable reason, still personal data should > be handled as conservative as possible. What property of the blue sheet makes it personal data. > Without a significant and > measurable economic advantage by the publication, we should rather not > publish this data with the proceedings. > (My underlying assumption is of course that currently our cost of > subpoenas is not forbiddingly high compared to overall conference costs. > If that assumption proves to be false, I would have to rethink my > statement above.) > > Besides that: > - am agnostic on whether we ask for email address or not (in the end I > gave up on hiding my email address as a way to reduce spam...) > - even without publication, we could still scan the blue sheets and > maintain them in an electronic archive without keeping the hard copies > (please note there may be legal requirements on procedures of handling > non-paper copies that are later to be used in a court of law). > - And if we would go to a Hiroshima/RFID model, the discovery in > subpoenas could be much easier compared to scanned paper documents with > handwritten names. > > Just my 5cents. > > Tobias > > > > On 23/04/12 12:41, Russ Housley wrote: >> Hi Tobias. >> >> I would like to make them available as part of the proceedings so that >> anyone can find them and view them. This _may_ reduce subpoenas for >> the blue sheets in the future. >> >> Many people have expressed similar thoughts about the RFID >> experiment. Last time we investigated a system for IETF meetings, it >> was quite expensive. I'll ask again to see if this has changed. >> >> Russ >> >> >> On Apr 22, 2012, at 11:44 PM, Tobias Gondrom wrote: >> >>> Hi Russ, >>> >>> from a privacy perspective: may I ask for what purpose you propose to >>> publish the blue sheets (with the names of all WG session attendees) >>> with the proceedings? >>> AFAIK, at the moment the blue sheets are basically available on >>> request especially in case of IP questions. What would lead to the >>> proposal to publish the list of names of attendees always with the >>> proceedings? >>> >>> Best regards, Tobias >>> >>> >>> Ps.: btw. though I might be the only one, but I liked the blue sheet >>> replacement experiment (RFID) in Hiroshima... >>> >>> >>> >>> On 22/04/12 22:31, IETF Chair wrote: >>>> At IETF 83, we had a discussion about the future of blue sheets, >>>> many spoke at the mic in support of the proposal. There has been >>>> very little discussion on the mail list. However, all of the >>>> discussion that I have see has been very supportive. >>>> >>>> The suggestion is three blue sheet changes: >>>> 1. No longer ask for email address; >>>> 2. Scan the blue sheet and include the image in the proceedings for >>>> the WG session; and >>>> 3. Discard paper blue sheets after scanning. >>>> >>>> Please speak up if you think this is the wrong thing to do. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Russ >