[notahacker]

Not writing down anything youd be upset another person read is a pretty standard instruction for people doing interactions with ordinary business clients anywhere that data protection legislation theoretically allows them to make a statutory request the company send records you hold about them (Probably other jurisdictions too, if their lawsuits have a discovery process)

And that's "dear junior sales team members, please don't put your opinion of the client in writing, in the unlikely event they ask for a data dump they might be a bit miffed", not "dear compliance chief, please don't write confessions to breaking laws our lawyers might be able to argue we attempted to comply with when we inevitably have to defend ourselves in court..."

[JumpCrisscross]

> that's "dear junior sales team members, please don't put your opinion of the client in writing, in the unlikely event they ask for a data dump they might be a bit miffed"

One of my first moves running a trading team is reducing or eliminating internal chat. I don’t think I’ve gone a week without at least one client receiving an inappropriate nickname. It’s harmless. But it’s not something you want showing up in discovery or a regulatory inquiry.

[kasey_junk]

I was _shocked_ when I moved from finance to tech and chat retentions (if they weren’t infinite) were set in months.

I was used to low single digit days retention. I still think that’s a good policy even without compliance issues. Keeping chat from becoming a de facto document management system.

[dogmayor]

So true. Been on both sides of this coin. Lawyers, judges, jurors will jump on any language that gives the slightest impression of bad acting.