On Saturday 26 June 2010, Don Armstrong wrote: > My own opinion is that we've done this backwards, and that everything > on -private modulo vacation messages and posts explicitely marked with > a header indicating that they shouldn't be declassified should be > declassified automatically after three years.
But that's not what the project decided to do, so it's rather moot. > Unfortunatly, a large majority[1] of the messages to -private > shouldn't be private in the first place, or they only need to be > embargoed for a short period of time. Any real evidence to support that rather strong claim? IMO most threads on d-private get started there because the sender actually wants the subject to be private. I agree that some threads could just as well have been public and also that some threads branch out into subjects that could be public. But it seems to me that those are also often the least interesting, so what's the gain in declassifying them? IMO the whole idea of partial declassification stinks anyway. Is it really desirable to declassify some messages in a thread but not others? Does that give "the public" a balanced view of a discussion? It also seems to me that in any declassification scheme the risk of declassifying a message which its author did not intend to ever become public is very high. Just consider that an objection also extends to any replies that quote (part) of it. Or maybe someone simply forgets to mention that condition. I think it's safer to err on the conservative side and simply respect the privacy of the list unconditionally. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201006260054.17327.elen...@planet.nl
