[Osmf-talk] OSMF Articles of Association - Discussion on Revision for 2013 AGM

[Jonathan]

+1
On 19/04/2013 02:44, Oleksiy Muzalyev wrote:
> Good morning,
>
> I am sure everyone read this by now: "German privacy regulator orders 
> Facebook to end its real name policy" 
> http://www.itworld.com/security/328387/german-privacy-regulator-orders-facebook-end-its-real-name-policy
>
> I deleted my "Facebook" account for the same reason, because my real 
> name is also stated on my bank card, on the real world ID card, etc. 
> Real names harvesting, identity theft is a growing phenomenon. People 
> sometimes have to go through pain of of changing their real names 
> after an identity theft. It is life shattering experience.
>
> The list of real names should not be too readily available on-line. 
> Obtaining a real name in proper context is already 50% of an identity 
> thief's "work". I do not know how realistic is the danger for a mapper 
> from "The Man" in a company or from some democrature regime, but the 
> identity theft is a reality around us. It is multi-billion criminal 
> "business".
>
> There should be, in my opinion, at least some systematic barrier for 
> accessing real names list on-line. For example, a member may request 
> to see the list, and it is shown on a page, which does not allow an 
> easy copy-paste. For example, a Flash, or an image page with real 
> names in a format not too suitable for OCR (optical character 
> recognition). And no access to real names via search.
>
> brgds
> Oleksiy
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Alex-7
>
> On 19.04.2013 1:55, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 19.04.2013 00:35, Steve Coast wrote:
>>> Personally, for privacy reasons I disagree. My belief is that opt outs
>>> should exist in some way, for at least some data. For example, 
>>> employees
>>> at major map companies may wish to keep their membership private from
>>> their employer.
>>
>> That is a valid argument - some people might also want to keep their 
>> membership private from the dictatorship they live in.
>>
>> However I think that we have to weigh and balance goals here. What is 
>> more important: Everyone's ability to convince themselves that 
>> nothing fishy is going on (with the potential downside of some people 
>> not being able to join for privacy reasons) - or everyone's right to 
>> join (with the downside of much reduced transparency)?
>>
>> I think that "if you want to remain anoymous, you can be a mapper but 
>> not a member" is an acceptable price to pay for transparency.
>>
>> Bye
>> Frederik
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk