Gunnar Wolf writes ("Re: Proposed GR: Acknowledge difficulty of declassifying
> I am replying to this particular one because, although I found your
> previous mail a great summary, I tried to illustrate current
> practice. I made the mistake of addressing only "moving a thread out
> of private", as we have never "declassified a thread that happened in
> private" - But restricting to this (much smaller) set, that's what is
> customary: To ask explicit permission from all of the people I am
> quoting when sending a public mail referencing a private discussion.
Ah, right, that makes sense.
> But yes, I agree, it's not exactly synonimous, and we should be
> dealing with the broader topic (declassification of what happened long
> ago) and not with its easiest corner case.
I think it would be worth me including something about this in the
next version of my summary.
Ian Jackson <ijack...@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.