This poll uses @cassidyjames’s suggestions for opt-in/opt-out terminology. I’m keeping Cassidy’s definitions and removing some of the commentary — see the link for details. Please note that no one is suggesting or considering a “buried opt-out” approach here. That option is just here to be complete.
I would be willing to accept[1] Fedora Workstation gathering FESCo-approved aggregate metrics, using the following approach:
- Buried opt-in: this would be, say, requiring digging into settings or installing a package to enable a feature.
- Buried opt-out: this would be on-by-default feature that requires digging into settings or uninstalling a package to disable it.
- Explicit opt-in: this would be similar to how location services works in GNOME today, where it is presented clearly upon first-run, is unchecked, and requires performing an explicit action to opt in.
- Explicit opt-out: It is just like the explicit opt-in, but the checkbox is checked by default. Notably, the feature is not enabled until a user explicitly sees this choice and continues without opting opt.
- Explicit opt-out for sending data, but data collection may begin immediately: [mattdm: This matches the original proposal — see details there.]
- Explicit choice: A feature is clearly presented with two options, enable or disable, and the risks/benefits are clearly laid out as part of the choice. The user must actively make a decision, and neither is considered the “default.”
- None of the above: I don’t think any such proposal should be considered
- None of the above: I don’t like this proposal but would consider something with significantly different implementation
- None of the above: Something else
By “willing to accept”, I mean something between “I’m satisfied that this is a reasonable approach for Fedora” and “I am opposed, but do not feel negatively enough about it to walk away from the project”. This is part of consensus decision making. In a community, we don’t always agree, and in fact we sometimes strongly disagree. But, as long as we have reasons to stay together and work towards a bigger common goal, in some of those cases, we agree to express our dissent and step aside. Other times, one might decide that a particular issue is too important for that. Because we have a bigger shared purpose, when that happens, we work find a different answer that everyone can accept in this way, even if it isn’t their preference. Thank you to @bob131 for asking me to clarify this! ↩︎