[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: GR proposal: give up on declassifying debian-private (Re: General Resolution: Declassifying debian-private results)


I will not comment on the process, just on this proposal:
(comments inline, real reply below)

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 04:47:16PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: 
> Formal proposal for amendment to Gunnar's GR: delete all, and replace
> with:
>  Title: Acknowledge difficulty of declassifying debian-private

so the title is changed to "we ack it's difficult".

>  1. The Debian Project regrets the non-implementation of the 2005
>     General Resolution titled "Declassification of debian-private list
>     archives".  That General Resolution is hereby repealed.

"dict repeal" tells me this means that GR is made invalid, annulled,
ceases to be affective.

>  2. In case volunteers should come forward: Permission remains for the
>     list archives (of any messages, whether posted before or after
>     this resolution) to be declassified, provided that the
>     declassification process is at least as respecting of the privacy
>     of posters to debian-private as the process set out in the 2005
>     General Resolution.

and *boom*, this contracts §1 of this proposal (though matches the

>  3. Furthermore, the Debian listmasters remain empowered (subject to
>     the usual consultation processes within the Debian project) to
>     revise the rules governing the privacy and declassification of
>     messages to -private.  This includes making measures to make
>     declassification more widely applicable, or easier to automate.
>  4. But, any weakening of the privacy expectations must not be
>     retrospective: changes should apply only to messages posted after
>     the rule change has come into force.
>  5. In particular, we reaffirm this rule: no part of a posting made to
>     -private, which explicitly states that it should not be
>     declassified, may be published (without its author's explicit
>     consent).  This rule may be changed by the listmasters (para.3,
>     above), but only for future messages (para.4, above), and only
>     following consultation, and only with ample notice.

(off topic to the main point of my reply, but still a question I have: can
one also retroactively say "please don't publish any posts from me ever"?)

>  5. Participants are reminded to use -private only when necessary.

I like this reminder, in general! :)

So, my concern with this proposal: it's something else than Gunnar's
original proposal, which is "revert the GR from 2005, stop trying to
classify -private". So I would like Gunnar's proposal to stay on the
table, as it is.

The above proposal from Ian I find confusing as it is unclear, as I see
it, it says "let's stop this unless maybe someone wants to", which would
result in noone knowing what's going on with publification of -private.
Obviously I'm fine with being it a seperate option on the ballot, even 
though I neither second nor support it ;-)


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: