17 Replies Latest reply: Sep 24, 2013 11:31 AM by Melissa Rosen RSS

    Groups use Case: members' privacy concerns, recommender, and activity stream

    Melissa Rosen

      I have a use case that I am trying to make sure I can accommodate in Jive-- I think I can, but just need some help in thinking through the pieces.

       

      Here is the use case:

       

      A group, LGBT, would like to leave their group open for viewing to all, but allow only members to create content, and of course, Admins can have full access (this is how they have it set up in our wiki currently). This can be accommodated via the Members Only Group in Jive.

       

      In addition, in order to protect the privacy of members who may not want to be identified as a member of that group, they are currently not listing members on their current wiki site. Only Admins know who members are. So, in Jive, the solution: I can advise them to not use the Recently Joined (or any members-related) widget, and thereby keep the members list private, only accessed by Group Admins. Testing my assumption here-- is this the right solution?

       

      The goal here is to create as open a group as possible, but to also protect the privacy of those who want to be members of LGBT Group, but not comfortable with that being known. I see that an Open Group still has a Manage>Members function (presumably we would just invite members via the invite function)-- if I use an Open Group for LGBT, people won't have to join, is that correct? If I use the Open Group and invite members, Will this avoid the information showing up in the activity stream? Or are Private and Secret Groups better for reasons I haven't figured out yet?

       

      Additional Concerns:

      • In the Activity Stream, under All Activity: When someone joins a group, it shows up here. "Mary Jones joined Name of Group"-- Is there any way to suppress this for a specific Group or Space?
      • In Recommender: If Melissa creates content in LGBT as a member (not Admin), is there a possibility it will show up in Recommender to someone who may not know Melissa is a member (this is the scenario we want to avoid)? Is there any way to suppress LGBT content from showing up in anyone's Recommender feed? Or to maybe only recommend it to other LGBT members?
        • If Melissa joins the LGBT group, will Recommender someday recommend to someone she doesn't know that well to also join the group, simply because we are linked in some way in Jive? Again, a scenario we are trying to avoid.
      • Groups I am a Member of: I see on my Profile, Places tab shows a list of every group I am a member of-- any way to suppress just one group or space to not show up here?

       

       

      Again this is all with an eye toward respecting the privacy of those who may not want to be openly identified as members of the LGBT group. I just need to know what is possible, so that I can arm the team with information and recommendations.

      Lots of questions here-- Any thoughts on how to go about this are appreciated!

        • Re: Groups use Case: members' privacy concerns, recommender, and activity stream
          Kevin Crossman

          A group, LGBT, would like to leave their group open for viewing to all, but allow only members to create content, and of course, Admins can have full access (this is how they have it set up in our wiki currently). This can be accommodated via the Members Only Group in Jive.

          Yep.

           

          Or, a space where the permissions are coming in via some external source. At our company we have an application where users can subscribe to email aliases - which are used by our Jive instance as security groups. Join the alias and you're then able to have edit permissions in the space.

           

          In addition, in order to protect the privacy of members who may not want to be identified as a member of that group, they are currently not listing members on their current wiki site.

          If anyone can view the content of the group -- and if only members of the group can post content -- then wouldn't anyone who posts content in that group be (pardon the phrase) be outing themselves?   There is no good use to hide the members panel when anyone posting content is then essentially associated automatically as a member. Assuming, of course, you want members to actually post content.

           

          if I use an Open Group for LGBT, people won't have to join, is that correct?

          Yep. 

          If they do join then they'll be shown.

           

          If you used a Private group then all current group members could see each other. Would that be okay?

           

          • In the Activity Stream, under All Activity: When someone joins a group, it shows up here. "Mary Jones joined Name of Group"-- Is there any way to suppress this for a specific Group or Space?
          • In Recommender: If Melissa creates content in LGBT as a member (not Admin), is there a possibility it will show up in Recommender to someone who may not know Melissa is a member (this is the scenario we want to avoid)? Is there any way to suppress LGBT content from showing up in anyone's Recommender feed? Or to maybe only recommend it to other LGBT members?
            • If Melissa joins the LGBT group, will Recommender someday recommend to someone she doesn't know that well to also join the group, simply because we are linked in some way in Jive? Again, a scenario we are trying to avoid.
          • Groups I am a Member of: I see on my Profile, Places tab shows a list of every group I am a member of-- any way to suppress just one group or space to not show up here?

          All good questions for Jive. I am thinking the out of the box behavior would not be what you want.

           

          Again this is all with an eye toward respecting the privacy of those who may not want to be openly identified as members of the LGBT group.

          I certainly understand the concern. But, there are even a host of other group membership that are less politically charged that still might warrant this desire for restricted visibility for membership. That said, I'm no expert on this topic, but I have heard many LGBT advocates such as Dan Savage say that the more people are out the better it eventually becomes for acceptance etc.  So, that might be a possible retort for those folks in the community to be potentially reminded of.

           

          The other thing would be there's no requirement they join the group if they don't want to. If they want to "stay in the closet" so to speak they'll just have to be lurkers like everyone else.

          • Re: Groups use Case: members' privacy concerns, recommender, and activity stream
            Trisha Liu

            Melissa, thank you for so clearly describing what the group wants to accomplish. And great responses already provided by Kevin.

             

            One question for you Melissa:

            • If only Members can post
            • And if any person can read the content (Open group/space)
            • Then does this mean that the Members want to be anonymous?

             

            If that is what the group members are looking for, I'm not sure this can be accomplished. If I have a single profile in the community, I don't know of a way for me to post content 'as me' in one area, and 'anonymously' elsewhere.

              • Re: Groups use Case: members' privacy concerns, recommender, and activity stream
                Melissa Rosen

                Thanks to you both for quick replies! Kevin , that is a good point about content authorship being visible-- I think they are ok with that piece of the puzzle, I assume, because that is how it works now. But, I could maybe point this out as a reminder and see what they say. I think over the last 2.5 years, their community has gone through stages of being locked down, so the most recent stage is the most open it has probably been.

                 

                Trisha, we don't have any anonymous IDs either.  I think if members choose not to post content, then on our current wiki, they will remain totally anonymous (lurkers, essentially, but with the advantage of the group Admins being able to manage a Members list that they cultivate via members voluntarily joining).  with Jive, I think the additional concerns about stream, recommender, and showing membership of "groups I am a member of" are the main additional concerns.

              • Re: Groups use Case: members' privacy concerns, recommender, and activity stream
                Melissa Rosen

                Hi James Ungerer, was wondering if I could bug you for your thoughts on my original question: https://community.jivesoftware.com/thread/185982? Should have copied you in from the beginning.

                 

                I did subsequetnly read in the documentation that Recommender may show a person as trending, but if they are trending because of their activity in a secret group, then those without permission cannot see why they are trending. This sort of helps clarify that piece of it... although I was hoping a secret group is not the answer. Would prefer to keep the group as open as possible. That said, my role is largely "collect the information" and "inform"-- their community leaders will have to make the decision, based on their options.... i just need more clarity as outlined above.

                  • Re: Groups use Case: members' privacy concerns, recommender, and activity stream
                    james.ungerer

                    Hi Melissa,

                     

                    I read your post and let me post my thoughts here:

                     

                    1.  Hiding the membership without using Private groups.  You're right that the widgets should not be used but that still leaves the "People" tab of the group which shows the members there as well.  If you want that gone you'd have to do a theme changes (customization) that hides that tab.  I believe the CSS is #jive-place-tab-people { display: none;} (or something really close to that) would do it but again, it requires a customization.

                     

                    2.  Modifying the activity stream:  no you cannot do that out of the box and I'm not sure how you would suppress it in customization.

                     

                    3.  Recommender:  If they are trending it's due to all of their content in the system.  If all of their content is in secret groups I don't think it will pick that up but I'm not 100% sure.

                     

                    4.  Private Groups:  content is not visible to the public (no anonymous reading) but members are hidden.  In reality Kevin stated it that as soon as the person posts, they're seen as a member.  There's not 100% way to hide that.

                  • Re: Groups use Case: members' privacy concerns, recommender, and activity stream
                    Nikki Bussard

                    Melissa,

                    Would creating a space work? Kevin alluded to this above, but no one has followed up on that idea. I am still on 4.5, but I believe that spaces are completely open and that people can follow a space without anyone knowing. I'm assuming that is the main goal of anonymous membership, since as others have pointed out, joining for the privilege of posting automatically "outs" you. You can also grant "membership" as edit rights or posting rights through permissions (someone on Jive 5 keep me honest here). That might be a way to go.

                     

                    Another thought, if receiving notifications is the key need, is that I believe you can receive email notifications from an open group without joining it. So people could just follow the group and not become members. The downside is that the admin can't email them by using the functionality for sending an email to the group.

                     

                    I also found this interesting because I noticed that someone recently started an LGBT group in our community. They made it open or members only, but are not making any effort to hide membership. They do stress on every page and document that the group is for LGBT people and their supporters or other interested people, so it takes a little bit of the discomfort away. I don't know if this is something your group would be comfortable with.

                     

                    HTH,

                    Nikki

                    • Re: Groups use Case: members' privacy concerns, recommender, and activity stream
                      Ted Hopton

                      I think the short answer is that Jive is not designed to work this way. It's designed as an open community software where transparency is the norm. Attempting to hide people or from people just is not going to work well with this technology.

                       

                      I understand the use case, but I suspect it can't be supported well exactly as desired, in Jive. But they could make the group open and make clear that people who want to participate who do not want to be known to be participating MUST

                      • Not join it
                      • Not Follow it
                      • Not like, comment or post anything

                      (because all of those will show their identity in association with the group).

                       

                      People CAN anonymously

                      • Track the group and get notified of all that happens
                      • Get email notifications

                      so they can lurk if they wish.

                       

                      I would suggest clearly broadening the mission of the group: make clear that it is for not just LGBT but also for anyone who cares to join the discussions there. IOW, make it truly open so there is no assumption that members of the group are actually LGBT -- and get some high-profile people who fit that category to join as examples.

                        • Re: Groups use Case: members' privacy concerns, recommender, and activity stream
                          Tracy Maurer

                          I happen to know that this has in fact happened in our LGBT community. One of the high profile HR managers joined. And there are actually others who have commented that they aren't LGBT but are interested in LGBT rights and interests. If you can get people to make those sorts of statements, implicitly or explicitly, then it does help.

                          • Re: Groups use Case: members' privacy concerns, recommender, and activity stream
                            thebryceswrite

                            I second Ted's post here. We have an extremely active and open LGBT group in our community, and it basically operates as Ted has described. And there are a ton of people that interact in it, follow it, etc. that are not "LGBT", but just interested in or supporters of equal rights.

                             

                            I would just make that "mission" very clear on the front page of the community, and give a run down of either openly participate, or use the lurking features if you wish.

                             

                            We did actually have a situation that almost caused the owners of that group to lock it down (some non-members entered into what became a very visible and viral conversation around Chick-Fil-A, and not always in a supportive manner). But with some time and some consulting, we were able to convince them to keep it open and to use some specific Community Management techniques to continue to share openly and make sure the conversation within remained respectful.

                             

                            And things have gone "swimmingly" since. In fact...I think the controversy made the members of the group come together to be even more committed to their community, more proud to be known as a member, and more interested in using it as both a place to connect and a place to educate.

                             

                            Would love to hear a report on how things have gone since last year!  Great topic.

                          • Re: Groups use Case: members' privacy concerns, recommender, and activity stream
                            Kathleen Gladstone

                            This thread has been very helpful.  It clears up quite a few questions around "expected privacy" within a social group. 

                            • Re: Groups use Case: members' privacy concerns, recommender, and activity stream
                              Melissa Rosen

                              hello all. Kathleen's post brought this back to my attention. The LGBT Network (along with other networks) rolled out as a members group, and has really been going along splendidly. I think the initial questions and concerns were just a part of the natural process of understanding how everything works and becoming knowledgeable and comfortable with that. I think from a company culture perspective, being "social" in this platform is very new, so folks just wanted to make sure they understood all the nuances.