On Sun, 2010-12-05 at 19:38 +0100, david blanchard wrote: > So the way I see things is a minimal but strong fictional context that > naturally uses everything for which there is no ethical question (like > tools - all tools available on the web), and give ourselves the > freedom to ask ourselves, on a case to case basis, if it's ok to > involve a real organization/person, ok on an ethical basis, as Xav was > suggesting. The idea for me is to keep the freedom of choice all the > time and not be toot bound to any real organization/person so that it > could create an issue later - therefore we need strong fictional > elements so that we can chose to include or not real elements without > impacting the core of the story. > What do you think ? I'm not sure I'm very clear (english on these > topics is quite tough for me), please let me know I can elaborate.
I'm not sure I understand, nope : ) For example, what about a mission that deals with wikileaks. The NGO wants to help the initiative (because its serves its agenda for whatever reason), and let's say for example that you would need to secure a chat conversation (actually, this could be fun - you would for example have to protect a website from incoming attacks, while being able to listen/read the conversation). This would be more fun if the conversation involves Assange, since it is the public face associated with the initiative. Xavier. _______________________________________________ Farsides mailing list - [email protected] Wiki: http://farsides.com/ List: http://farsides.com/ml/ Forum: http://farsides.com/forum/ Ideas: http://farsides.com/ideas/ Chat: http://farsides.com/chat/
