couchdb-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joan Touzet <>
Subject Re: Sharing data with third-parties
Date Thu, 01 May 2014 21:10:50 GMT
Agree to all and will restate what I said before: "Web Analytics" is too
broad, we need to define that term more narrowly, at which point I think
we can share only aggregate technical info and avoid anything that
attempts to get into individual demographics as pure conjecture only.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Wenk" <>
Sent: Thursday, May 1, 2014 3:32:33 PM
Subject: Re: Sharing data with third-parties

Hi Noah,

+1 for your suggestions where and with whom to share the for 1), 2), 3) and



On 1 May 2014 20:50, Noah Slater <> wrote:

> Marketing team,
> I'd like to discuss the privacy of data the project collects, so we
> know what can be shared on the lists, and with interested
> third-parties.
> I'd like to cover these types of data:
> 1) Download stats
> 2) Web analytics for the website and the blog
> 3) Size of the mailing lists
> 4) Composition of the mailing lists
> Here's what that data can be used for:
> (1) and (2) can be used to measure popularity of CouchDB and how our
> marketing efforts and releases have an impact on the project.
> (3) can be used to get a sense of how big the community is, and how
> that is changing over time.
> (4) can be used to get demographic information. There are plenty of
> tools that will mine information from a list of email addresses,
> linking people up with employers, LinkedIn profiles, and other social
> media.
> Now, as far as I am concerned:
> (1) is fine and I am happy sharing that on this list.
> (2) should be for committers by default only, but relevant info can be
> posted if it helps us in our marketing efforts. Popular page views,
> specific page views, paths/clicktrails, browser demographics, and so
> on.
> But what about information like location, age, gender, interests and
> so on (which you can get from some analytics tools). I think we'd have
> to make sure that whatever was being shared publicly was 1) actually
> useful to us and needed to be shared, and 2) heavily aggregated so as
> not to cause any privacy concerns.
> (I am more interested in doing the right thing here than I am getting
> around the legalities of the situation.)
> (3) is fine, and we share this every three months already in our board
> reports.
> (4) seems like something that ought to be confidential and not shared
> with anyone outside of the PMC for any purpose.
> If we shared (4) with anyone, we'd have to share it with everyone, per
> our strict vendor neutral position. And there is already a strong
> consensus on the internal ASF press@ list that this is out of the
> question.
> What do other people think?
> Thank you,
> --
> Noah Slater

Andy Wenk
Hamburg - Germany

GPG fingerprint: C044 8322 9E12 1483 4FEC 9452 B65D 6BE3 9ED3 9588

View raw message