[sudo-discuss] privacy and violations; nym rights and other.

Thu Apr 11 13:48:27 PDT 2013

This looks like a case of technology not communicating the intent of its
users.

The verbiage about the private  list of members comes from our
mail software, mailman, and refers to the fact that you can't send a
command to get a list of subscribers.

The presence of the archive link in the footer, and the fact that that
clicking the link takes you to a page that's accessible to the world at
large, reflects the intent of the group: these messages are posted on the
Internet.

Now I could pull out my giant libertarian nerd dong and tell George he
should have known better - but I also have empathy for his sense of being
violated.

Maybe there's a way to work together to anonymize George's past remarks?
The mailman software stores the email addresses in a plaintext format, as
far as I recall.

Anca

On Thursday, April 11, 2013, Anon195714 wrote:

>
> Sorry but a little more "transparency and openness" about what was going
> to happen to emails to that list, rather than using overtly misleading
> language, would have prevented this kerfluffle in the first place.
>
> "Categorically object" all you like, but that boils down to an assertion
> that you have some kind of right to make and spread copies of someone
> else's words _against their will_, and infringe their privacy _against
> their will_, which is truly authoritarian.
>
> Aestetix, if you're reading this, your input would be highly welcome.
>
> Meanwhile I have work to do today.
>
> -G.
>
>
> =====
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 13-04-11-Thu 10:58 AM, rachel lyra hospodar wrote:
>
> At the bottom of every email to this list is a link to 'listinfo' which
> opens with an archive of every post to the list.  If the boilerplate seems
> unclear to people we can talk about changing it but I categorically object
> to removing anything from the archive.
>
> Transparency and openness are part of our core values, archiving emails is
> very standard, the listinfo page makes it clear that this is done using
> completely standard language, and if anyone wishes to have their statements
> go unattributed they are welcome to not enter them into the Internet, or to
> use a pseudonym.
>
> R.
>  On Apr 11, 2013 10:53 AM, "Anon195714" <anon195714 at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> Let's be really clear about this:
>
> This is the explicit language in the sign-up document:
>
> "Subscribing to sudo-discuss
> Subscribe to sudo-discuss by filling out the following form. You will be
> sent email requesting confirmation, to prevent others from gratuitously
> subscribing you. This is a private list, which means that the list of
> members is not available to non-members."
>
> "THIS IS A PRIVATE LIST, WHICH MEANS THAT THE LIST OF MEMBERS IS NOT
> AVAILABLE TO NON MEMBERS."
>
> That's a representation of a material fact.  And the link to the archive
> says NOTHING about that archive being anything that would violate or
> contradict the language I quoted above: no disclosure, no nothing.
>
> Blatant misrepresentation.
>
> "May need to be doing a better job" is the understatement of the year.
>
> The answer is, I'm going to hold SudoRoom to the terms & conditions I
> signed, and that material is going to be taken down immediately until such
> time as anything I've posted in it can be removed from any publicly
> searchable content.  This is not optional, any more than free repair under
> warranty is optional, or the absence of horsemeat in "100% beef
> frankfurters" is optional.
>
> I'm holding SudoRoom to its stated language.
>
> -G.
>
>
>
> ======
>
>
>
> On 13-04-11-Thu 10:42 AM, Marina Kukso wrote:
>
> hi george,
>
>  i'm very sorry that you feel that you did not consent to having this
> information public. this list has been publicly archived since it began and
> i think that we've tried to make that clear (although it seems that we may
> need to be doing a better job!).
>
>  unfortunately i'm not sure to what extent the "welcome to sudo-discuss
> list" email that new list members receive includes information about
> content being publicly archived (could someone help with this?), but
> perhaps we may need to make this more explicit in that letter.
>
>  for additional background on why we made the decision to publicly
> archive contents, the idea is not necessarily to promote "transparency and
> openness" as a matter of principle only, but because part of what we wanted
> to do with sudo room is to make our history as easy for others to use as
> possible so that others who are starting and running hackerspaces can learn
> from our experience and discussion. in other words, to facilitate
> ctrl-c/ctrl-v of hackerspaces around the world.
>
>  - marina
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Anon195714 <anon195714 at sbcglobal.net>wrote:
>
>
>
> Right, and when you slip LSD into the fruit punch at a party and don't
> tell anyone, do you justify that by saying you're trying to encourage
> enlightenment?   Who needs informed consent anyway, right?  Hey, who needs
> consent of any kind?
>
> Sorry yo, that don't go.  It's NON CONSENSUAL, like seducing someone and
> failing to disclose to them that you have STDs.  It's a trust-break in a
> big way.
>
> I'm asserting my right to put this on the meeting agenda for next
> Wednesday, and pull in any record of anything I signed that contained TOS.
>
> Let me be really clear about this:  I'm as serious as a fucking heart
> attack about this, and anyone who thinks it's a joke is fucking sick.
>
> This "open and transparent" stuff is starting to become a chant fit for a
> cult, that short-circuits reason and critical thinking.  In reality it's a
> house of one-way mirrors foisted by the powerful on the masses to enable
> "prediction and control" down to the level of the individual.
>
> Enough was enough long ago, just like muggings and the rest of it.
>
> -G.
>
>
>
> =====
>
>
>
>
>
> On 13-04-11-Thu 10:07 AM, mattsenate at gmail.com wrote:
>
> We set the list up to be public in an effort to remain as transparent and
> open as possible. This is a blessing and a burden. We should be mindful of
> the scope of our language and interested in maintaining private
> conversation off the list.
>
> Additionally, if you seek a lot of privacy, I don't recommend
> communicating over the internet if it can be helped.
>
> // Matt
>
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "Tracy Jacobs" <kinetical at comcast.net>
> To: "Romy Ilano" <romy at snowyla.com>
> Cc: "sudo-discuss" <sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
> Subject: [sudo-discuss] Michael Orange - film events - Battle for Brooklyn
> - any sudo members interested in an intro?
> Date: Thu, Apr 11, 2013 9:54 AM
>
>
> Sudoers,
>
>  Why does our discussion list have to be published on the internet?  I
> don't personally want  it to be that public.  Who decided it should be done
> that way, and is there another option?
>
>  Tracy
>  On Apr 10, 2013, at 12:32 PM, Romy Ilano <romy at snowyla.com> wrote:
>
>  Hey  here is one of the film events that Michael Orange from top 10
> social is presenting.
>
>
>
> https://www.facebook.com/events/563556023675662/?notif_t=plan_user_invited
>
>  Michael's also working with the Oakland Library as well,so I'll mention
> the history wki people from sudoroom are there!
>
>
>  this probably isn't necessary for anyone here... but in case one or two
> people gets the temptation:
>
>  -- Michael Orange is an all around good guy--please treat him well,
> minimize over the top business plans, "industry type behavior", and
> approach him as you would a family member. If we talk to him the wrong way
> it will be a smear on my reputation and his opinion matters a lot to me. =D
>
>
>
>   _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
>
>

-- 
-=-=-=-
Anca Mosoiu | Tech Liminal
anca at techliminal.com
M: (510) 220-6660
http://techliminal.com | T: @techliminal | F: facebook.com/techliminal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20130411/e128caee/attachment.html>