[liberationtech] archives public

[Anne Roth]

I assume that most everyone on this list shares your realism but still I
think the list info page shouldn't misinform people regarding that?

Besides which I, and probably many others, have made the experience that
there's generally a difference between what could happen and what
actually will which leads to me thinking that it's worth guarding as
much of my privacy as possible.

Knowing that this is generally not bullet-proof, but knowing also that
sometimes 'the other side' has to make choices how to spend their time
and energy. Which makes it worth putting up as many fences as possible.

Anne




Am 09.08.12 09:44, schrieb Greg Norcie:
> Any list is effectively public.
> 
> I'd bet hard cash that any list like LibTech has at least one person
> siphoning off posts to some database.
> 
> As Benjamin Franklin said "Three can keep a secret - if two of them are
> dead"
> 
> 
> It's a sad state, but it is good opsec to assume anything sent to a
> large group like LibTech is effectively public.
> 
> Not making a value judgement - I am no fan of the "transparent society".
> But I'm also a realist.
> --
> Greg Norcie (greg at norcie.com)
> GPG key: 0x1B873635
> 
> 
> On 8/9/12 12:39 AM, Anne Roth wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just saw through this tweet
>> https://twitter.com/csoghoian/statuses/233445976365465603 that the list
>> archives are public (see
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/info.html)
>> - is everyone aware of that?
>>
>> Until now I thought that they're available to list members only, as
>> stated here https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>
>> I tend to prefer non-public but can see why public makes sense as well.
>> In any case that should be clearly mentioned on the info page, don't you
>> think?
>>
>> Anne
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 


-- 

http://about.me/annalist
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x7689407F942951E2