5 ms·

But I could make a table Request(email, url, submitted) and a table Response(data) And you couldn't connect the response to the user. Thats the important part

But I could make a table Request(email, url, submitted) and a table Response(data) And you couldn't connect the response to the user. Thats the important part right? not the ability to resend a request

silisili 4y ago
I'd argue recording anything at all, including whether I did it, breaks the 'completely anonymous' contract. Then we're left with...mostly anonymous. But at that point it's a black box. It could be done how you describe. Or it could be attaching my name to the survey and emailing the CEO directly. I'd never know the difference.
- nh23423fefe 4y ago
  I mean sure. If you think someone is lying to you then it doesn't matter. But I disagree with "getting a reminder means its not anonymous" its completely orthogonal.
jayd16 4y ago
Are you assuming the request to respond is broadcast to all recipients regardless of response status?
- nh23423fefe 4y ago
  No implementation is something like email is primary key, url is per user. going to page and submitting will do two things. the table Request will be updated and marked submitted. the table Response will be populated with only the data.
  - jayd16 4y ago
    If you can derive the email at submission time then its not anonymous.
    - nh23423fefe 4y ago
      It seems like the disagreement is between what makes data anonymous. If I write a letter and don't sign it. It's anonymous. Someone could use a corpus of my text and infer I wrote it. That doesn't mean I didn't write anonymously. I could make 2 updates to 2 tables and then end result would be that having both tables wouldn't let you correlated the data with submitters. Yes if you control every aspect of the process you can lie to people. Thats not the point. If you think someone is lying to you to harm you why would you interact with them?
      - jayd16 4y ago
        The point is there's ways to achieve this even assuming bad actors and doing something that's obviously flawed doesn't seem helpful.
        nh23423fefe 4y ago
        > obviously

silisili 4y ago

I'd argue recording anything at all, including whether I did it, breaks the 'completely anonymous' contract. Then we're left with...mostly anonymous. But at that point it's a black box. It could be done how you describe. Or it could be attaching my name to the survey and emailing the CEO directly. I'd never know the difference.

nh23423fefe 4y ago
I mean sure. If you think someone is lying to you then it doesn't matter. But I disagree with "getting a reminder means its not anonymous" its completely orthogonal.

jayd16 4y ago

Are you assuming the request to respond is broadcast to all recipients regardless of response status?

nh23423fefe 4y ago
No implementation is something like email is primary key, url is per user. going to page and submitting will do two things. the table Request will be updated and marked submitted. the table Response will be populated with only the data.
- jayd16 4y ago
  If you can derive the email at submission time then its not anonymous.
  - nh23423fefe 4y ago
    It seems like the disagreement is between what makes data anonymous. If I write a letter and don't sign it. It's anonymous. Someone could use a corpus of my text and infer I wrote it. That doesn't mean I didn't write anonymously. I could make 2 updates to 2 tables and then end result would be that having both tables wouldn't let you correlated the data with submitters. Yes if you control every aspect of the process you can lie to people. Thats not the point. If you think someone is lying to you to harm you why would you interact with them?
    - jayd16 4y ago
      The point is there's ways to achieve this even assuming bad actors and doing something that's obviously flawed doesn't seem helpful.
      - nh23423fefe 4y ago
        > obviously