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

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Russ Allbery writes ("Re: GR proposal: give up on declassifying debian-private (Re: General Resolution: Declassifying debian-private results)"):
> Seconded (with or without the minor wording nit), since I think this
> should be on the ballot.  (Not sure yet which option I'll be voting for.)

Thanks.

> >>  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.
> 
> I think you mean retroactive here, not retrospective.

Maybe this is a US/UK difference.  In British English "retrospective"
is the term for a rule, law, decision which takes effect with respect
to past actions, events or situations, or for an act which is deemed
effective as if it had been done earlier than it really was.

I searched my personal ~/News/Uk.legal.moderated and it has 39
occurrences of "retrospective" and none of "retroactive".  (Although
this is a biased sample as I save all my own posts.)

I hope the meaning is clear even to a US reader, given that I explain
exactly what I mean by "retrospective".

JOOI what is the antonym ?  In my idiolect it is one of the meanings
of "prospective".  "Proactive" means something quite different.

Thanks again.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.