Re: Future Handling of Blue Sheets

The registration number links to a registration that includes an email address, 
should that need to be looked up for some reason later.

Holding minimal information for the purpose, and keeping that information as 
non-identifiable to the holder as possible, would be nice properties?

Tim

On 17 Jun 2012, at 08:36, Yoav Nir wrote:

> This creates a distinguished identity, so if two "Fei Zhang"s attended in 
> Paris (only case I found in the attendee list), this would distinguish which 
> of them attended a particular meeting. It would not, however, tie them to an 
> identity on the mailing list, or to the "Fei Zhang" who attends the Vancouver 
> meeting, so I'm not sure what purpose it serves.
>
> Yoav
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org 
> [mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Tim Chown
> Sent: 16 June 2012 13:54
> To: Joel jaeggli
> Cc: IETF Chair; IETF; ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
> Subject: Re: Future Handling of Blue Sheets
>
> If the purpose is simply differentiation of people with the same names, could 
> we not ask people to enter the last four digits of their IETF registration 
> number, which would presumably be unique, while being easy to remember?  The 
> number could even be on your badge to always be easy to look up.
>
> Unless there's some reason to keep registration numbers private?
>
> That would also allow poorly handwritten names to more readily be 
> checked/corrected by OCR when the sheets are scanned.
>
> Tim
>
> On 16 Jun 2012, at 04:50, Joel jaeggli wrote:
>
> > On 6/15/12 14:42 , edj(_dot_)etc(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com wrote:
> > > I presume it is the same data that people input into the "Organization" 
> > > field when they register for the meeting.
> > I do change mine based on what capacity I'm attending a particular 
> > meeting in. That goes for email address on existing blue sheets as well...
> >
> > The nice people who send me a check every two weeks don't generally 
> > fund my attendance.
> >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Ed  J.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Eric Burger <eburger-l(_at_)standardstrack(_dot_)com>
> > > Sender: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
> > > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 17:37:50
> > > To: IETF Chair<chair(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
> > > Cc: IETF<ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
> > > Subject: Re: Future Handling of Blue Sheets
> > >
> > > Do we have guidelines as to what is an "organization affiliation"?
> > >
> > > On Jun 14, 2012, at 5:26 PM, IETF Chair wrote:
> > >
> > > > Two things have occurred since the message below as sent to the IETF mail 
> > > > list.  First, we got a lawyer in Europe to do some investigation, and the 
> > > > inclusion of the email address on the blue sheet will lead to trouble with 
> > > > the European privacy laws.  Second, Ted Hardie suggested that we could 
> > > > require a password to access the scanned blue sheet.
> > > >
> > > > Based on the European privacy law information, the use of email will 
> > > > result in a major burden.  If the email address is used, then we must 
> > > > provide a way for people to ask for their email address to be remove at 
> > > > any time in the future, even if we got prior approval to include it.  
> > > > Therefore, I suggest that we collect organization affiliation to 
> > > > discriminate between multiple people with the same name instead of email 
> > > > address.
> > > >
> > > > Based on Ted's suggestion, I checked with the Secretariat about using a 
> > > > datatracker login to download the scanned blue sheet.  This is fairly easy 
> > > > to do, once the community tracking tools are deployed.  However, with the 
> > > > removal of the email addresses from the blue sheets, it is unclear that 
> > > > there is any further need for password protection of these images.  
> > > > Therefore, I suggest that we proceed without password protection for the 
> > > > blue sheet images.
> > > >
> > > > Here is a summary of the suggested way forward:
> > > >
> > > > - Stop collecting email addresses on blue sheets;
> > > >
> > > > - Collect organization affiliation to discriminate between multiple 
> > > > people with the same name;
> > > >
> > > > - Scan the blue sheets and include the images in the proceedings for 
> > > > the WG session;
> > > >
> > > > - Add indication to top of the blue sheet so people know it will be 
> > > > part of the proceedings; and
> > > >
> > > > - Discard paper blue sheets after scanning.
> > > >
> > > > Russ
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On May 6, 2012, at 12:46 PM, IETF Chair wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > We have heard from many community participants, and consensus is quite 
> > > > > rough on this topic.  The IESG discussed this thread and reached two 
> > > > > conclusions:
> > > > >
> > > > > (1) Rough consensus: an open and transparent standards process is more 
> > > > > important to the IETF than privacy of blue sheet information.
> > > > >
> > > > > (2) Rough consensus: inclusion of email addresses is a good way to 
> > > > > distinguish participants with the same or similar names.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Based on these conclusions, the plan is to handle blue sheets as follows:
> > > > >
> > > > > - Continue to collect email addresses on blue sheets;
> > > > >
> > > > > - Scan the blue sheet and include the image in the proceedings for 
> > > > > the WG session;
> > > > >
> > > > > - Add indication to top of the blue sheet so people know it will be 
> > > > > part of the proceedings; and
> > > > >
> > > > > - Discard paper blue sheets after scanning.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On behalf of the IESG,
> > > > > Russ
>
> Scanned by Check Point Total Security Gateway.