announcements · Uncategorized

Google spreadsheet: collective library & member info

I have created a publicly viewable Google spreadsheet with the following information:

  • Member information (rank, KGS handles, etc.)
  • Collective go book library

Several people have asked me to make my spreadsheet public, but I have been reluctant for privacy reasons.  To address this, I’ve made a public version of the spreadsheet that presents only first names and last initials, and I’ve greatly simplified the information on the sheet. It’s very incomplete, so I’ll need data from you all to fill it in.

If you are on the spreadsheet and you do not want to be, or you feel that there’s too much information there, please let me know (comment here, write me email at paul -AT- tesseract -DOT- org, or mention it to me on some Tuesday club meeting).

If you are a member and want edit access to the spreadsheet, send me the email address to which your Google account is connected, and I’ll add you to the editor list.  Don’t make obnoxious changes, please … and please try to respect people’s privacy.

Alan M. also suggested that we put together a collective Go library:  A list of the go books we all have.  I think that is a fantastic idea, and one of the sheets in the spreadsheet is meant to capture this.  To fill it out, I’ll need you to send me the books you have.

9 thoughts on “Google spreadsheet: collective library & member info

  1. Why not just ask people what info that you have on them can and can not be handed out to Club members and the public, so you do not need to be worried about giving to much info?

    You seem very concerned about this.

  2. First, anyone publishing any information about others in a public forum should be concerned about such issues.

    Second, I am essentially doing exactly this: Both my post and the spreadsheet have notes that people can ask me to remove information. I am happy to ask people at club meetings, too, but I’m not sure how that is substantively different from what I’m already doing.

    I see no good reason to publish people’s complete names. What is gained by doing so? It still would be unwise for me to ASSUME they are okay with it, so it’s actually MORE work to track down every member and secure their permission.

  3. 1. ok you seemed very concerned I did not mean anything bad by say sorry.

    I only suggested this because then it be more cut and dry (or clear).

    FootNote I was talking about every thing you have (Please do not answer to this part.)

    2. Fine

    3. I never said anything about full names! I never even suggested it ANYWHERE in ANYWAY.

  4. It seems I’ve irritated you, which was not my intent. I simply wanted to be clear what my position was on the matter.

    I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on the matter of which method is more cut-and-dried, as it seems to me securing everyone’s explicit permission is the more complicated route than to simply assume they do not give it.

    I misunderstood you, then. You asked (in another forum) me to publish my basic statistics, and I indicated that I could not do that until I’d sanitized them. I assumed when you followed up here, you were disagreeing with this.

    At any rate, I’ll try to put the stats together in a way that’s more careful about people’s information than what I currently have, then add it to the “public” spreadsheet.

  5. Sorry about that but your post (at least to me) sounded irritated as well.

    I was thinking that that rout mite just be easier. Of course it does not really matter what methods you use.

    “At any rate, I’ll try to put the stats together in a way that’s more careful about people’s information than what I currently have, then add it to the “public” spreadsheet.”
    Not sure that you mean by this. I am not saying this is anything wrong with what you have. (If that is what you might be thinking.)

    sorry again

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *