Privacy vs. Transparency

[Johannes Zarl-Zierl]

Hi Christian,


Am Sonntag, 31. März 2019, 11:14:14 CEST schrieb Christian Imhorst:
> Am 29.03.19 um 17:24 schrieb Florian Snow:
> I'm with you, that we have to protect the value of privacy. But if I
> write an e-mail to different mailing lists, no matter how "internally"
> they are, this e-mail is no longer private. If it still contains
> fundamental criticism, this e-mail will reach a larger public.

Regardless how intelligence agencies try to bend the public perception, "not 
private" is not remotely the same as public.

All internal FSFE mailing lists that I have at some point been subscribed to 
operate under the Chatham house rule[1]. This rule allows for publication of 
contents to a wider audience, provided the anonymity of the people involved is 
provided.

Breaking this trust is a serious issue in itself, and should IMO be discussed 
separately from the actual leaked/published content.

  Johannes


[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatham_House_Rule
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20190331/6375e5aa/attachment.sig>