Let's be really clear about this: This is the explicit language in the sign-up document: "Subscribing to sudo-discuss Subscribe to sudo-discuss by filling out the following form. You will be sent email requesting confirmation, to prevent others from gratuitously subscribing you. This is a private list, which means that the list of members is not available to non-members." "THIS IS A PRIVATE LIST, WHICH MEANS THAT THE LIST OF MEMBERS IS NOT AVAILABLE TO NON MEMBERS." That's a representation of a material fact. And the link to the archive says NOTHING about that archive being anything that would violate or contradict the language I quoted above: no disclosure, no nothing. Blatant misrepresentation. "May need to be doing a better job" is the understatement of the year. The answer is, I'm going to hold SudoRoom to the terms & conditions I signed, and that material is going to be taken down immediately until such time as anything I've posted in it can be removed from any publicly searchable content. This is not optional, any more than free repair under warranty is optional, or the absence of horsemeat in "100% beef frankfurters" is optional. I'm holding SudoRoom to its stated language. -G. ====== On 13-04-11-Thu 10:42 AM, Marina Kukso wrote:

At the bottom of every email to this list is a link to 'listinfo' which opens with an archive of every post to the list. If the boilerplate seems unclear to people we can talk about changing it but I categorically object to removing anything from the archive. Transparency and openness are part of our core values, archiving emails is very standard, the listinfo page makes it clear that this is done using completely standard language, and if anyone wishes to have their statements go unattributed they are welcome to not enter them into the Internet, or to use a pseudonym. R. On Apr 11, 2013 10:53 AM, "Anon195714" <anon195714(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Oh hai! Rather busy today, but this is worth a moment of input. I do think it's worth looking at what people expect when they hear the word "transparency." It's also worth considering what it means when we assume that all our communication will be archived by Google, by default, unless we specifically opt-out (robots file, etc). There's also the use case issue (I'm sure there's a more proper term). I'm totally ok with our list being transparent to people who want to learn and teach others. I'm a lot less ok with it going to a large company that will be using it to data-mine what products to target consumers with. If you take that a step further you'll find a quasi-analogy to Real Genius. That said, this is part of a much larger "boundaries" discussion the internet is forcing the world to have right now. Anyhow, just my two cents, feel free to disregard at your pleasure :) Hail Eris, aestetix User-agent: googlebot Disallow: * On 4/11/13 11:27 AM, Anon195714 wrote: Michael's also working with the Oakland Library as well,so

Actually, a little more research and calmness on your end would have certainly prevented this 'kerfluffle'. Fully concur with everything rachel said, here. If you don't want your words to be potentially public, don't use the internet. I learned that one when I was 12. I'll spend some time today rewording the list signup page to be more clear. Please keep in mind we are a voluntary association of individuals *volunteering our time* to set up things like mailing lists and wikis. And both of these are commonly known to be publicly accessible. Sorry but a little more "transparency and openness" about what was going to happen to emails to that list, rather than using overtly misleading language, would have prevented this kerfluffle in the first place. "Categorically object" all you like, but that boils down to an assertion that you have some kind of right to make and spread copies of someone else's words _against their will_, and infringe their privacy _against their will_, which is truly authoritarian. Aestetix, if you're reading this, your input would be highly welcome. Meanwhile I have work to do today. -G. ===== On 13-04-11-Thu 10:58 AM, rachel lyra hospodar wrote: At the bottom of every email to this list is a link to 'listinfo' which opens with an archive of every post to the list. If the boilerplate seems unclear to people we can talk about changing it but I categorically object to removing anything from the archive. Transparency and openness are part of our core values, archiving emails is very standard, the listinfo page makes it clear that this is done using completely standard language, and if anyone wishes to have their statements go unattributed they are welcome to not enter them into the Internet, or to use a pseudonym. R. On Apr 11, 2013 10:53 AM, "Anon195714" <anon195714(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: _______________________________________________ sudo-discuss mailing list sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss

+1 on programmatically stripping out email addresses etc outside the body of text. i could figure out the code for this in *shudder* VBA, but I fear it would bring shame upon us all to attempt using VB of any sort. If there is a way to start a user index for each thread in a private table, and replace email addresses with user1...user_n in the public archives, I think it would strike a good balance between openness and anonymity moving forward. Apr 11, 2013 12:27:12 PM, eddan(a)clear.net wrote: Indeed, thank you Jenny, Marc and perhaps others I don't know about for all the volunteer time you've put in for almost a year and a half on the mail servers and navigating all the newly created lists. I think that the change from hackerspace.org to sudoroom.org may have left some threads that we didn't anticipate and now would in fact be a good time to fix those. Fully concur with everything rachel said, here. If you don't want your words to be potentially public, don't use the internet. I learned that one when I was 12. I'll spend some time today rewording the list signup page to be more clear. Please keep in mind we are a voluntary association of individuals *volunteering our time* to set up things like mailing lists and wikis. And both of these are commonly known to be publicly accessible. Sorry but a little more "transparency and openness" about what was going to happen to emails to that list, rather than using overtly misleading language, would have prevented this kerfluffle in the first place. "Categorically object" all you like, but that boils down to an assertion that you have some kind of right to make and spread copies of someone else's words _against their will_, and infringe their privacy _against their will_, which is truly authoritarian.  Aestetix, if you're reading this, your input would be highly welcome. Meanwhile I have work to do today. -G. ===== On 13-04-11-Thu 10:58 AM, rachel lyra hospodar wrote: 'listinfo' which opens with an archive of every post to the list.  If the boilerplate seems unclear to people we can talk about changing it but I categorically object to removing anything from the archive. Transparency and openness are part of our core values, archiving emails is very standard, the listinfo page makes it clear that this is done using completely standard language, and if anyone wishes to have their statements go unattributed they are welcome to not enter them into the Internet, or to use a pseudonym. R. On Apr 11, 2013 10:53 AM, "Anon195714" anon195714(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: Let's be really clear about this:  This is the explicit language in the sign-up document: "Subscribing to sudo-discuss Subscribe to sudo-discuss by filling out the following form. You will be sent email requesting confirmation, to prevent others from gratuitously subscribing you. This is a private list, which means that the list of members is not available to non-members." "THIS IS A PRIVATE LIST, WHICH MEANS THAT THE LIST OF MEMBERS IS NOT AVAILABLE TO NON MEMBERS." That's a representation of a material fact.  And the link to the archive says NOTHING about that archive being anything that would violate or contradict the language I quoted above: no disclosure, no nothing. Blatant misrepresentation.  "May need to be doing a better job" is the understatement of the year. The answer is, I'm going to hold SudoRoom to the terms & conditions I signed, and that material is going to be taken down immediately until such time as anything I've posted in it can be removed from any publicly searchable content.  This is not optional, any more than free repair under warranty is optional, or the absence of horsemeat in "100% beef frankfurters" is optional.  I'm holding SudoRoom to its stated language.  -G. ====== On 13-04-11-Thu 10:42 AM, Marina Kukso wrote: hi george, i'm very sorry that you feel that you did not consent to having this information public. this list has been publicly archived since it began and i think that we've tried to make that clear (although it seems that we may need to be doing a better job!). unfortunately i'm not sure to what extent the "welcome to sudo-discuss list" email that new list members receive includes information about content being publicly archived (could someone help with this?), but perhaps we may need to make this more explicit in that letter. for additional background on why we made the decision to publicly archive contents, the idea is not necessarily to promote "transparency and openness" as a matter of principle only, but because part of what we wanted to do with sudo room is to make our history as easy for others to use as possible so that others who are starting and running hackerspaces can learn from our experience and discussion. in other words, to facilitate ctrl-c/ctrl-v of hackerspaces around the world. - marina On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Anon195714 anon195714(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: Right, and when you slip LSD into the fruit punch at a party and don't tell anyone, do you justify that by saying you're trying to encourage enlightenment?   Who needs informed consent anyway, right?  Hey, who needs consent of any kind?  Sorry yo, that don't go.  It's NON CONSENSUAL, like seducing someone and failing to disclose to them that you have STDs.  It's a trust-break in a big way.  I'm asserting my right to put this on the meeting agenda for next Wednesday, and pull in any record of anything I signed that contained TOS. Let me be really clear about this:  I'm as serious as a fucking heart attack about this, and anyone who thinks it's a joke is fucking sick.  This "open and transparent" stuff is starting to become a chant fit for a cult, that short-circuits reason and critical thinking.  In reality it's a house of one-way mirrors foisted by the powerful on the masses to enable "prediction and control" down to the level of the individual. Enough was enough long ago, just like muggings and the rest of it. -G. ===== On 13-04-11-Thu 10:07 AM, mattsenate(a)gmail.com wrote: up to be public in an effort to remain as transparent and open as possible. This is a blessing and a burden. We should be mindful of the scope of our language and interested in maintaining private conversation off the list. Additionally, if you seek a lot of privacy, I don't recommend communicating over the internet if it can be helped. // Matt ----- Reply message ----- From: "Tracy Jacobs" To: "Romy Ilano" Cc: "sudo-discuss" Subject: [sudo-discuss] Michael Orange - film events - Battle for Brooklyn - any sudo members interested in an intro? Date: Thu, Apr 11, 2013 9:54 AM Sudoers, Why does our discussion list have to be published on the internet?  I don't personally want  it to be that public.  Who decided it should be done that way, and is there another option?  ; Tracy On Apr 10, 2013, at 12:32 PM, Romy Ilano romy(a)snowyla.com wrote: Hey  here is one of the film events that Michael Orange from top 10 social is presenting. https://www.facebook.com/events/563556023675662/?notif_t=plan_user_invited Michael's also working with the Oakland Library as well,so I'll mention the history wki people from sudoroom are there! this probably isn't necessary for anyone here... but in case one or two people gets the temptation: -- Michael Orange is an all around good guy--please treat him well, minimize over the top business plans, "industry type behavior", and approach him as you would a family member. If we talk to him the wrong way it will be a smear on my reputation and his opinion matters a lot to me. =D _______________________________________________ sudo-discuss mailing list sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss _______________________________________________ sudo-discuss mailing list sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss _______________________________________________ sudo-discuss mailing list sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss _______________________________________________ sudo-discuss mailing list sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss >_______________________________________________ sudo-discuss mailing list sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss _______________________________________________ >sudo-discuss mailing list >sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org >http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss >_______________________________________________ >sudo-discuss mailing list >sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org >http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss

Yeah i want to put in my vote as not sympathetic with Anon195's outrage. I'm sympathetic with 'being mad at onesself for overlooking something obvious,' but not with feeling tricked. Dude, literally every email you get is two links away from the public archive!!! Moreover, aren't mailing lists like the first thing the internet had? One of the first things I ever read on the internet were mailing/ discussion list archives about ska music. I generally expect to be able to read the archives of any list I'm on or interested in, which means I expect them to be public and searchable. If this was a list for grandmas I would maybe feel like it had a duty to be super explicit, it could assume its members knew nothing about the internet or how to use links, but this is a hackerspace email list. If you guys want to make the archives private that's ok because it's easy to sign up for the list. On Apr 11, 2013 10:58 AM, "rachel lyra hospodar" <rachelyra(a)gmail.com> wrote:

George in fact has stories about the crypto wars and Internet policy that are so valuable that they should be documented here at Sudo Room because of its uniqueness and technological depth. I also hope George gets some sleep today and remembers when he wakes that we're all on the same side, even if we don't know it yet. In regards to the snippet from the sudo-discuss info page, i actually read it to mean that the list of members is private, not the discussion. But I will also admit that I had to read it more than once to figure that out. One useful thing we can do as we integrate privacy by design into the tools we develop is to come to a more mutual understanding of what we mean by privacy. Disclosing my bias up front, I find Helen Nissenbaum's contextual integrity way of thinking about it resonates most with me (see her book Privacy in Context: Technology, Policy, and the Integrity of Social Life (2009) - http://www.sup.org/book.cgi?id=8862). Given the key role context plays in privacy whether or not you agree with her whole theory, we should parse out what our expectations of privacy are in the different forms of communication we have and ways we associate. So .... what is your expectation of privacy in some of the following contexts: - at a Sudo Room RL meeting in the common area. - at Sudo Room in the Sudo Room room in the back. - while standing outside the building smoking something - over the sudo-discuss mailing list & its public archives - in one of our spin-off subject matter specific mailing lists - at Sudo Square - in the bathroom anywhere in the Sudo Room building - inside a Sudo-related office, such as Roshambo's at the 2135 entrance, or the Public School or the eddan.com office (suite 5) - over IRC (or other chat) - on the Wiki and on the etherpad - conversations that start with: "Let me tell you this, but you have to promise to keep it secret" sent from eddan.com On Apr 11, 2013, at 11:56 AM, Romy Ilano <romy(a)snowyla.com> wrote: