Re: Proposed GR: Repeal the 2005 vote for declassification of the debian-private mailing list

2016-09-12 Thread Didier 'OdyX' Raboud 
Le jeudi, 1 septembre 2016, 23.15:05 h CEST Gunnar Wolf a écrit :
> === BEGIN GR TEXT ===
> 
> Title: Acknowledge that the debian-private list will remain private.
> 
> 1. The 2005 General Resolution titled "Declassification of debian-private
>list archives" is repealed.
> 2. In keeping with paragraph 3 of the Debian Social Contract, Debian
>Developers are strongly encouraged to use the debian-private mailing
>list only for discussions that should not be disclosed.
> 
> === END GR TEXT ===

Seconded.


-- 
Cheers,
OdyX

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Proposed GR: Repeal the 2005 vote for declassification of the debian-private mailing list

2016-09-12 Thread Didier 'OdyX' Raboud 
Le dimanche, 11 septembre 2016, 11.01:09 h CEST Anthony Towns a écrit :
> In that sense, my reading of the original version of the GR that just
> failed was pretty much "eh, we don't care that much about transparency
> when it comes to ourselves and it's time we admit that". Which is fine,

I supported the previous GR, and will second Gunnar's, not because I think "we 
don't care much about transparency", but rather because I think time has now 
shown that the process as decided in 2005 was unrealistic and impractical.

I now also tend to think that we, as a collection of individuals, also need 
some sort of "safe space" to discuss certain things, that can't be public. 
Some of these things can't immediately be public, and some other things can't 
ever. Separating both is a herculean task, which is why I'm not suprised noone 
has really started, especially not within the 2005 GR canvas. d-private can 
only be a good safe-space if its privacy promise will hold forever.

In short, I see value in having the projet say "d-private is our internal 
communication channel; it's an explicit step away from our transparency 
promise, but we value its importance as a safe-space for our members, and as a 
medium to discuss sensitive and/or private topics. We promise (and have all 
members as testimonials) to restrict it's usage to topics that really need to 
be private"

-- 
Cheers,
OdyX

Publication information about  IJMEI  Journal

2016-09-12 Thread IJMEI Journal 
--- International Journal of Management and Economics Invention e-ISSN : 
2395-7220

Submission Open for Submit an article for  2016
You can Submit Your Article via Online System
If any difficulty you can also submit to: edi...@rajournals.in

International Journal of Management and Economics Invention (IJMEI) aims to 
advance both theoretical and empirical research, inform policies and practices, 
and improve understanding of how economic and business decisions shape the 
lives of worlds
Scope/Coverage
IJMEI is a multidisciplinary journal and welcomes papers from all the major 
disciplines in economics, business and management studies including (but not 
limited to):-
Management, Marketing, Strategy, Finance and investment, Organizational 
behavior, Cross-cultural management, International trade, Business economics, 
Entrepreneurship, Economic Development
The Editor now invites contributions for potential publication in the IJMEI 
journal.
Submission of a paper
Articles submitted for consideration must explore the extent to which existing 
theories, models and concepts in economics, business and management can 
effectively be employed to explain the developmental challenges in worlds. The 
journal also encourages the development and testing of new theories and models 
that provide managers and policy makers with novel insights and approaches to 
addressing their real problems.
Best Regards,
Journal Manager
Inter. Jour. of management and economics invention ---
==
International Journal of Management and Economics Invention[ e-ISSN : 2395-7220 
]
http://rajournals.in/index.php/ijmei-home

Unsubscribe debian-vote@lists.debian.org from this list:
http://rajournals.us13.list-manage2.com/unsubscribe?u=400561260efd344861f804cdb=fe71f61987=0a17c03725=97769fdc63

Our mailing address is:
RA Journals
40 satya sai colony sanjit naka Kityani
Mandsaur 45001
India

Our telephone:


Forward this email to a friend:
http://us13.forward-to-friend.com/forward?u=400561260efd344861f804cdb=97769fdc63=0a17c03725

Update your profile:
http://rajournals.us13.list-manage1.com/profile?u=400561260efd344861f804cdb=fe71f61987=0a17c03725

Re: Proposed GR: Repeal the 2005 vote for declassification of the debian-private mailing list

2016-09-12 Thread Carsten Leonhardt 
Bart Martens  writes:

> Anyone reading something of potential public value on debian-private
> can always request the original author for permission to quote in
> public. Note that the original author is the only person who can fully
> assess how private the message was, since personal limits differ and
> the relevant privacy aspects may not even be explicitly mentioned in
> the message.

This actually sounds very much like some of the plans for
declassification I've read here.

 - Carsten

Re: Proposed GR: Repeal the 2005 vote for declassification of the debian-private mailing list

2016-09-12 Thread Thibaut Paumard 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

Le 10/09/2016 à 10:46, David Kalnischkies a écrit :

> 2. My interest in declassification is (surprise surprise) apt
> related, as its history has obvious plot holes. It is hard enough
> to follow over a few lists which are used pretty interchangeable,
> with references to dead websites and unrecorded IRC that to follow
> the occasional reference from deity to private (and back) could be
> interesting. It is at least what I thought while not having access
> to -private archives and that memory is still strong.  Public
> interest is of course non-existent, but the prospect of never being
> able to fix these holes or to at least mark the holes as lost in
> time makes me a bit sad.  Not that I believe in the strong
> possibility that I could even if all of -private would be 
> declassified entirely right about now, but just like apt I like to 
> accumulate options more than removing them.
> 

Dear David,

This is a very well defined goal that you have here. If you do care
and do volunteer for the task, why don't you try to identify the
relevant messages for your historic interest, and propose a process to
declassify only this subset, perhaps by contacting the original
authors individually if this is an option?

Kind regards, Thibaut.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
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=dekI
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Proposed GR: Repeal the 2005 vote for declassification of the debian-private mailing list

2016-09-12 Thread Russ Allbery 
Didier 'OdyX' Raboud  writes:

> I now also tend to think that we, as a collection of individuals, also
> need some sort of "safe space" to discuss certain things, that can't be
> public.  Some of these things can't immediately be public, and some
> other things can't ever. Separating both is a herculean task, which is
> why I'm not suprised noone has really started, especially not within the
> 2005 GR canvas. d-private can only be a good safe-space if its privacy
> promise will hold forever.

Furthermore, I think it's unrealistic that such a space won't exist.  If
we remove debian-private on the grounds that it's contrary to project
goals, that email will just move into private email threads cc'd to
leader@ or DAM, and become even less transparent.

This is a human thing, not a technical thing.

Likewise, that's why the correct points about how non-private
debian-private is in practice aren't really on point.  Often the concern
isn't full-blown confidentiality, but casual searchability or just the
desire to not have to immediately deal with reactions (including via
private email) from the general Internet.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)