Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

The Fine print: The following are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Journal by dalek

I've been approached about working on a new privacy policy for SoylentNews and have agreed to do so. This journal is the first step in that process.

SN currently runs on Rehash, which is written in Perl and dates back to Slash 2.0. Many privacy-related considerations in Rehash are dictated by decisions made by the Slashdot admins nearly 25 years ago when they wrote the original code. The age of this code and its dependencies on tools like mod_perl make it nearly unmaintainable, meaning that SN may implement a new code base sooner rather than later. This is a pivotal time to discuss a new privacy policy for SN, an the decisions made now will likely influence the implementation of whichever new code base powers SN in the future.

SN has three primary stakeholders, which are 1) the ownership, 2) the staff, and 3) the community. To be successful, any site policy needs the support of all three of these stakeholders. That means the community needs to be actively engaged in the process.

My first steps will be to solicit input from the SN community and to spend most of my time listening. There are three important questions to discuss:

1) Problems: What privacy-related considerations are important to you, the members of the SN community? What are your concerns? As long as the issues are reasonably relevant to privacy, anything should be on the table here. This includes things like what user data gets stored, how long it is retained, who has access to it, the right to be forgotten, anonymous commenting, and anything that can reasonably be construed as a privacy issue.

2) Process: All three stakeholders must be supportive of any privacy policy for it to be effective. Therefore, once a privacy policy is drafted, we need a process for all three stakeholders to approve this. I anticipate the biggest questions here will be how you, the members of the SN community, get to voice your support or to request amendments to the policy. What process would the community like us to follow for enacting policy? Do all logged-in users get to vote? Does the community elect representatives?

3) Potential Solutions: Once you, the members of the SN community, make your privacy concerns heard, we need potential solutions for those concerns. These solutions will be limited by a few constraints. To allow for robust discussions and make SN a welcoming community, we need the ability to track abuse of the site (e.g., spam comments, sock puppet account creation, gaming the moderation system, etc...) to prevent disruption of the discussions. SN is required to comply with the laws in relevant jurisdictions such as the United States and the state of Delaware. Any solutions have to be practical, given the limited financial and human resources. Working within those constraints, SN policy should go above and beyond what is merely required by law, and to maximize the privacy of the members of the community.

I'll start by posting three journals at least 7-10 days apart to discuss each of these issues. For this journal, I want to focus on the first point, which is what privacy concerns you have, What is important to you, as members of the SN community, and what do we need to address in the new privacy policy? While any discussion of privacy matters is on-topic in this journal, I'd like to try to keep the discussion focused as much as possible on privacy-related problems that we need to address.

There are a few ground rules in this discussion:

1) If you're giving examples of specific privacy concerns, please don't include actual user names or people. Please use hypothetical terms, or use generic names like "person A" and "person B."

2) The new privacy policy is forward looking, meaning that the discussion should focus on how we can be better in the future, and not on holding people responsible for past mistakes or how the existing code is written.

3) Please keep the discussion civil and welcoming. Everyone deserves a chance to participate in this discussion and to be heard. Please keep the discussion constructive and refrain from posting personal attacks. Privacy is for everyone, and that means everyone deserves to be heard. I ask that you please don't try to dominate the discussion or shout other people down, and instead let everyone make their opinions known.

4) Please keep the discussion on-topic. Any privacy-related matters are on-topic, but issues like story selection are beyond the scope of this policy. Let's keep issues like politics out of this discussion, too.

5) Please don't moderate people down unless they're off-topic, trying to dominate the discussion, shouting people down, or posting personal attacks. Even if you disagree with someone else, please don't moderate them down unless they're violating the ground rules for this discussion. I want everyone to be heard.

I pledge that I'll read every comment that you post. My direct input to this discussion will be minimal, and I probably won't post at all except maybe to answer questions or ask for more detail if appropriate. I'm not here to debate with people. I just want to listen to your concerns. Anonymous Cowards are welcome in this discussion, but all comments that I post will be from the dalek account. I have unchecked the "willing to moderate" box in my user preferences, which means that I am not moderating any comments in this discussion. I am just here to listen.

I want to make these discussions as inclusive as possible. That means I intend to allow Anonymous Coward input to all of these journals. In exchange for keeping these discussions open, I ask that you please keep these discussions on track. I will post future journals, but for now, I want to know what your privacy concerns are, and what topics we need to address in the new privacy policy.

Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Reply to Comment Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02, @10:23AM (4 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02, @10:23AM (#1309413)

    I think what everyone is trying to say, is that we need a privacy policy that is robust enough to withstand a rogue admin like janrinok. His witchhunt should not even be possible.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   -1  
       Troll=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Troll' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   -1  
  • (Score: 2) by janrinok on Friday June 02, @12:32PM (3 children)

    by janrinok (52) on Friday June 02, @12:32PM (#1309423) Journal

    If you want to discuss me personally - send me an email. It works fine for dalek and other people. I welcome the opportunity to explain why things are the way they are. I have no objection of anyone criticising me - but stop disrupting other discussions. Personal attacks are Off-Topic.

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02, @07:00PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02, @07:00PM (#1309456)

      Disrupting? Curious comment from a privacy violator!

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02, @07:18PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02, @07:18PM (#1309459)

      It does not work for me, transparency is what is needed. The fact that you previously let slip that hashed IPs are forever stored for registered users, but now you're playing word games to not exactly lie but oush "hashed IPs are dropped after two weeks" when previously that was only for the general AC account. Anyone that pays attention would see these patterns, but most users only see a few if these offtopic discussions since you're so keen to downmod every single one but mever your offtopic replies.

      Quite simply SN is run by admin abusing authoritarians that smear others for questioning authority and pointing out inconvenient facts. With human hive mentality it will take personal experience for each user to give these criticisms consideration. The lesson seems to be the same, anyone that appeals to authority and conceals problems should be treated as untrustworthy authoritarians.

      The real eye opener was seeing you authorize targeted abuse which obviously did not prevent the spamming account creator, so why? Any future community should be built on trust and transparency. Seems to be the last thing paranoid libertarian techies want to do, gotta keep the tight fist of control!

    • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 04, @08:07AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 04, @08:07AM (#1309714)

      Explain why things are they way they are, janrinok. Locked down, aristarchus banned, Runaway running away, khallow not being able to shut the up fuck. You think any of this is good for SoylentNews? You killed it, janrinok! SoylentNews has died under your watch. Time to just own up, and ride off into the singularity.