> Also, i've seen a couple of constructs whereby members of a regional group each have a vote in the EU group. This could entail that the EU will need the member database of the local group, but in this case privacy law and/or the local groups statutes may conflict.
Exactly, that's what I was thinking too.
We have strict policies for IT-PUG as far as privacy and data collection
are concerned, in order to protect privacy.
However, I think that if we study a proper solution, we can easily get
over them. After all we just need security precautions and transparency
I guess one solutoin is that the EU is responsible for writing privacy
policies and maintaining a secure database of users' data. For those
users that directly adhere to the EU PUG (because they are in countries
without local or localised groups), they MUST accept the privacy statement.
Those users that belong to a local group and accept the local group
policy, might be informed that they could become members of the EU PUG
if they want and they are asked to accept another privacy disclaimer.
I guess this scenario would be fine.
Gabriele Bartolini: Open source programmer and data architect
Current Location: Prato, Tuscany, Italy
gabriele(dot)bartolini(at)gmail(dot)com | www.gabrielebartolini.it
"If I had been born ugly, you would never have heard of Pelé", George Best
In response to
pgeu-general by date
|Next:||From: Gabriele Bartolini||Date: 2008-01-14 20:47:19|
|Subject: Re: Release Candidate of the PostgreSQL Europe
|Previous:||From: Koen Martens||Date: 2008-01-14 18:32:53|
|Subject: Re: Election for board of directors|