5 ms·
It could be also that the sales person did this on his own initiative for a couple of extra points. It might not be standard practice, but we'll never know.
by scoutt 6y ago
It could be also that the sales person did this on his own initiative for a couple of extra points. It might not be standard practice, but we'll never know.
- hobofan 6y agoIf a random sales person can easily go ahead and access PII on their own initiative, that's 1000x worse.
- that_guy_iain 6y agoYour PII will be in their CRM and they will have access to their CRM. Literally all they need to do this is your name and linkedin. If you think sales people won't have access to names of potential leads then I am not sure what you think sales people do on outbound sales.
- hobofan 6y agoEven in an CRM there should be checks on who can access what PII and when. There is a difference between "you are assigned 100 leads for the duration of lead qualification" and "you can yourself pick out leads (and can get access to their PII) out of any of the thousands of possible leads".
- that_guy_iain 6y agoI think your expectations of how a company handles Leads are unrealistic. A company just needs to keep your data safe. A sales person having access to Leads makes complete sense. A sales person being able to see if a lead has been chased makes sense. A sales person being able to find Leads to chase that they are best qualified to chase makes sense.
- SilasX 6y agoYes, and MS claimed that their agreement with Canonical required them not to share that info with sales.
- that_guy_iain 6y agoNo it said not use that for marketing. And they didn't, the sales person said he would be the point of contact. They didn't market or try to sell him something in his message. He just send a request to be his contact.
- SilasX 6y agoMost people would view the message as being marketed to. The employee was referred to as a salesperson. Any difference from marketing is pedantic.
- that_guy_iain 6y agoThe legal difference is important. No court would ever agree that “I’m your point of contact” is marketing anything. And since it was about the legal agreement between Microsoft and Cannonical the legal difference is anything but pedantic.
- SilasX 6y agoCourts look at the intent of contracts in the minds of the signers, not hyper literal readings of fixed-in-stone words. When both MS and Canonical agree that this breached acceptable usage, it’s time to give up that fight.
- that_guy_iain 6y agoNeither company as far as I can tell agreed to that. Cannonical said it was a poor choice of words and in light of that review their policies. Aka tell people not to be so creepy. Microsoft just stated what the terms were. Unless there have been new statements released which I doubt since legal would probably have a fit if someone did that. As I said no court would ever agree that “I’m your point of contact” is marketing.
- WrtCdEvrydy 6y ago$10 says there's an Excel sheet that's passed around with all of your info in it.
- hobofan 6y agoOf course there is, but there shouldn't be. _Especially_ in a bigger company like Canonical.
- disgruntledphd2 6y agoYeah, they should definitely be using Libre office ;)