couchdb-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Noah Slater <nsla...@apache.org>
Subject Sharing data with third-parties
Date Thu, 01 May 2014 18:50:32 GMT
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
https://twitter.com/nslater

Mime
View raw message