-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38
figure out consent with third parties #411
Comments
Similarities:
Differences:
|
Our requirement to share conversations publicly adds friction to our interactions with third parties. Especially when first reaching out to or being introduced to somebody, adding even more friction when we have no relationship yet is undesirable. How do we strike the right balance? How about language like this?
|
Probably also a good idea to get consent after in-person conversations. "I'm going to need to summarize this conversation for the Gratipay community. Do you want me to run that by you first or just send you the GitHub link after I post it?" |
Here's an example usage: #72 (comment). |
Another example: #456 (comment). I'm pretty well into this habit by now. Closing! :) |
Oops! Last thing is to codify it in a howto on Inside Gratipay ... |
We have good habits around getting consent from users before cross-posting publicly on GitHub. As we interface with journalists, conference organizers, potential vendors or funders, sales prospects, etc.—third parties that Gratipay wants to interact with—we need to develop good habits of consent in those conversations as well. One of the people I've interacted with in the wake of #384 flagged this as an issue.
What are the similarities and differences between the "user" and "third party" case? What's the best way to approach consent with third parties?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: