[Noisebridge-discuss] anti-anonymity proposal take 2

Rubin Abdi rubin at starset.net
Wed Mar 12 22:25:53 UTC 2014


Gregory Dillon wrote, On 2014-03-12 15:13:
> I think not.  But the structure of the State laws \ recognize that the
> communication and accountability goals furthered by allowing access to
> membership list are to be balanced against privacy interests of those
> involved who don't want their phone numbers and home addresses given out.
>    And if a member said to the secretary, I want the membership list, in
> order to  publicly dox it,  I believe the secretary could validly say, no,
> I am not providing the list for that purpose.

Could you please cite this?

Otherwise the consensus item is moot as it can be achieved with do-ocracy.

Note I didn't use the word "solved" in place of "achieved" as no one has
answered Naomi's very relevant question, what problem are you trying to
solve?

-- 
Rubin
rubin at starset.net

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20140312/b137ace5/attachment.pgp>


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list