First of all, are we talking on imposing this on users or will users have the possibility to opt out/in?
Especially the latter is very probabilistic, and sufficient of the first can still achieve clear profiles. You can create a lot of mistrust in European countries, especially if it is complemented by points like this:
I think this proposal is very dangerous in many non-US countries and its impact is hard to foresee. With that, I mean if and how many users will leave, but also what happens to their data. That the GDPR and such regulations are a “must” and no “should” is a personal opinion, not a fact. Please do not impose an opinion on others, making it a fact the community shall not discuss about.
Be aware that data collection in the US has on itself a problematic reputation especially in Europe. This is also an issue of different cultures.
Additionally, I am not sure how many people use Fedora also for work/business and related data: this may force them to switch to another system if this is not cared for. This has to be transparent, too. It is not acceptable imho to tell them that it is their problem to care for GDPR.
However, if the community agrees to that, I think a user should have the possibility to opt out during installation (better: opt in), and it should not be automatically enabled on updates or so.
Also, this is a matter of nudging: if you force people, they will often reject things they would accept if you leave them the choice during installation, and add good points about how this serves the community and is controlled by public policies of the community and such triggers to convince (and add a clear policy).
In either case, I think before bringing this to the community to make a decision, it needs to be much clearer what data is collected and so on: a policy (what, when, how, if, options) should be part of the proposal, not its next step after the decision. The same for what can happen to the data and about what anonymous or non-invasive is. Especially the latter two are critical and complex tasks…
Given the proposal as it is, I have to say that I do not see the responsibility from the owners I would expect for collecting any data. It asks for a general agreement without answering the related questions, and even excludes some (making it the problem of the users). Thus, the proposal already excludes …
… during the ask for agreement.