UN Declaration of Human Rights Article 27 concerns around wording and conflation of roles about documents HOT 3 OPEN

Please feel free to make a concrete suggestion for wording changes. We will be glad to consider it.

from documents.

How about the "data custodian", and not breaking down further intermediate roles, except saying the custodian makes the data accessible to the epidemiologist's analyses ("analyst").

from documents.

Re-reading the letter today, I observe that we used the language of "act of presence". We wrote this because we didn't know what else to write at the time. Our stance was more anticipatory, knowing that there would be unknowns ahead.

Of course, this language of "act of presence" acquires new relevance in light of the COVID crisis. As soon as COVID happened, I knew instinctively language would matter in framing the debate.
This is what drove me to submit so early to filing a GitHub issue (within the first ten).

In itself, this GitHub issue, left unaddressed now for 27 days despite constructively engaging with the DP3T collaboration, is transforming into its own act of presence (thus compounding the severity of the problem).

I could expand at length - and document - the number of ways this language has proven harmful to DP3T's own stated goals, particularly in fighting PEPP's centralized model (since many DP3T collaborators care about that). Additionally, I am personally appalled at some public criticism received from some academic members of the DP3T collaboration, precisely leveraging the language of human rights to attempt at shaming the counter-voices that would be expressed at their efforts.

Judging the diversity of members of the consortium, and the local power plays tied to the first deployment of DP3T v1 in Switzerland, I question the diversity of voices within the DP3T collaboration.

from documents.