Comment (by Ian Hinder):

There is also the question of what this list of “members” is supposed to represent. Is it people who are actively using the toolkit, or all people who have ever used the toolkit? “Members” of a consortium, I think, should be the former. If we wanted to, we could then have “alumni” who are no longer using the toolkit. This would be a fairer representation; e.g. when applying for funding and stating the size of the consortium, it is an exaggeration to say that all the people on that page will benefit from whatever we are applying for, as many of them are likely no longer using the toolkit.

If we are listing the affiliation, we should make sure it is accurate. Come to think of it: are we in violation of the GDPR by even continuing to have this page here? I suspect so.

I propose:

• Collect the email addresses for everyone we can
• Ensure that when new people are added, we keep (privately) an email address for them
• Email each person once per year to confirm details, and ask if they are still using the toolkit.
• People get moved to Alumni if they don’t reply or say they are no longer using the toolkit (we might email them again to give them another chance before moving them)
• If someone doesn’t reply, a note is added to their name along the lines of “last updated XX/XX/XXXX”, so it’s clear that the affiliation might be out of date
• The page could have a global “Last updated” so people can see that anyone without a “last updated” is up-to-date as of that date.

This is probably not something we want to do manually, at least, not every year. Probably we want to do it manually the first time.

--
Ticket URL: https://bitbucket.org/einsteintoolkit/tickets/issues/2046/list-of-et-members-out-of-date