Re: General Resolution: Declassification of debian-private list archives
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 16:35:02 +0200, Lars Wirzenius <liw@liw.iki.fi> said:
> I like the proposed GR by Anthony Towns. I don't think it is against
> our constitution, and I don't see how it can be breaking any trust,
> since the authors and other affected people can prevent publication.
It is not at all clear to me that if my post was fully quoted
by another, then my wishes to have that quote redacted would be
honored. I may request it to be, and this shall be "taken into
consideration", but does that mean that the request should be
honored?
And, BTW, we had a stated policy of privacy on the mailing
list, we are now retroactively overturning that policy, and only
allowing a two month window for the author of an email to opt out
(and perhaps not fully, if quotes are not to be redacted). I am
conflicted about whether this is entirely kosher, given that the
public reputation of a deceased developer (for example of someone who
may find it hard to respond in a 6-8 week window) may be affected by
retroactively publishing emails written under an umbrella of privacy.
On the other hand, there were whole htreads of interesting
conversation peppered with all participants wondering why the thread
was on -private which should really see the light of day .... I would
like to make it easier to declassify such threads, while erring on
the side of not declassifying anything if there is even a hint that
the author may not want it public (like some of the more ascerbic and
virulent posts in heated threads that show people in a bad light
[unless express permission is given])
manoj
--
"Never give in. Never give in. Never. Never. Never." Winston
Churchill
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: