Hi Peter,
Peter Murray-Rust wrote:
I only just realised this might be a problem.
When mailing IsItOpen the email of the recipient appears in clear - this
could be scraped by bots. This is different from WhatDoTheyKnow where there
is an official FOI officer - here there is often only an assumed personal
contact (i.e. it may not be the right person to send to). Sending public
emails to arbitrary individuals might cause them public embarrassment,
especially when they might simply be an arbitrary contact. For some of the
organizations we are likely to write to the request itself may be seen as
confrontational. These organizations may well not have an official contact
of any sort and also where there is one it's of the form [email protected] which
probably isn't going to get a reply. (In a sense when we get friendly
addresses to write to the problem will have gone away).
I suspect that we should allow the email to be hidden (otherwise we are
effectively publishing people's emails without permission). But I'm not an
expert here. It may be useful to list the role of the person (e.g. Editor of
Fooics).
So far I have only sent emails to friendly recipients
P.
Thanks for your considerations. I'm sure you're right. To some extent
this is treading new ground, so it would be good to extend this
discussion to include when it is appropriate for the enquirer to follow
up the enquiry (how long does one wait for a reply?), whether 'thank
you' notes should be sent to acknowledge a response from the data
handler, whether there would be any such thing as an 'unhelpful
response' from the data handler (and what one should then do), and so on.
At any rate, I hope you like the new features. :-)
J.
_______________________________________________
okfn-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
