Andrew M.A. Cater writes, in an official statement of the Community Team: > Taking private communications and moving them onto public lists without > consent is unacceptable at any time.
I would to clarify/contest this. This rule, as stated, is very broad, unqualified, and absolute. If we take this at face value, in all of the following hyothetical examples, a hypothetical Alice (a Debian Member) would be behaving unacceptably according to the CT: 1. Alice emails her Member of Parliament about the UK Online Safety Act and its impact on online collaboration. She approves very much of the reply, and publishes it on debian-project. 2. An employee of a tech giant sends Alice an unsolicited email inviting her to help sneak spyware into a package she maintains. She publishes the email, causing a massive public row. 3. Bob, a member of the Debian Technical Commitee, CC's Alice on an mail with technical information contradicting Bob's public position; Bob explains in the mail that he doesn't want to have to explain the details in public because it would undermine support for his preferred outcome. Alice nevertheless posts the message publicly to the TC mailing list. I could go on. I think these examples demonstrate that any convention against posting private emails cannot be absolute. Rather, things are contextual. It depends on the power relationship, and on the role of each party in the conversation, and there are many exceptions where publication is fine - even, necessary. In Debian we supposedly value transparency. We should be making decisions, and carrying out consultations, and exchanging technical information, in public, unless there are very good reasons to do otherwise. Ian. [1] Presumably, the exchange is one that's on-topic. -- Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own. Pronouns: they/he. If I emailed you from @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
