[sudo-discuss] [omni-discuss] email archives for list members only, except announce?

Sat Oct 4 15:46:21 PDT 2014

Apologies, Mia, I was composing my email and sent it off before I saw you'd
replied. I'm sorry to hear you've had such a scary experience, and totally
empathize.

The issue of protecting one's personal identity is a different issue than
concealing all of our community's communications from public visibility.
Openness and transparency is critical to any radical endeavor, and rather
than resorting to the easy solution of locking things down, I think it's
important we endeavor to find creative solutions to tangible problems.

The former problem of protecting one's personal identity can be solved by
creating a pseudonymous identity from which to communicate with the group.
Several members of this list (and many members of sudo) use pseudonyms when
communicating with the community - some of them use those pseudonyms for
all online communications and also in-person! I'd be happy to help anyone
interested in creating a pseudonymous identity.

With love,

Jenny
http://jennyryan.net
http://thepyre.org
http://thevirtualcampfire.org
http://technomadic.tumblr.com

`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`
 "Technology is the campfire around which we tell our stories."
-Laurie Anderson

"Storytelling reveals meaning without committing the error of defining it."
 -Hannah Arendt

"To define is to kill. To suggest is to create."
-Stéphane Mallarmé
~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`

On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Jenny Ryan <tunabananas at gmail.com> wrote:

> Concur'd on all points, Matt. If people are concerned about their
> contributions being publicly viewable, they can post to 'confidential' or
> another private list - or simply have an in-person conversation. I'd like
> to know the particular use cases for which we would need closed, private
> mailing lists - because I strongly believe that open and transparent
> communication and documentation is essential to this project having an
> impact not just within our community, but for the wider world. If we intend
> to create something greater than ourselves, our methods of organizing, the
> problems we face and overcome, the things that bind or break us, our
> experiences of creating the space and communicating about it, all of this
> is vital and important knowledge we have a responsibility to share so that
> others may learn from, iterate off, adapt, fork, and possibly change their
> own corners of the world for the better, inspired by what we're doing here.
>
> Let's not keep our history to ourselves. Knowing that our communications
> are public and archivable also keeps us accountable to ourselves, each
> other, and the world. We should always _expect_ what we communicate online
> to become potentially public, and may as well just own it, be responsible
> for our words, and communicate with kindness and wisdom - because words are
> often the most powerful artifacts we leave behind for future generations to
> inherit.
>
> My favorite quote on communication, in particular the debate of dialogue
> vs. dissemination and the way in which communication flows from internal
> dialogue to outward dissemination:
> Justice that is not loving is not just; love that is not just is not
> loving. Just so, dissemination without dialogue can become stray scatter,
> and dialogue without dissemination can be interminable tyranny. The motto
> of communication theory ought to be: Dialogue with the self, dissemination
> with the other. This is another way of stating the ethical maxim: Treat
> yourself like an other and the other like a self.
>
> (John Durham Peters, Speaking Into the Air: A History of the Idea of
> Communication, p. 57)
>
> Jenny
> http://jennyryan.net
> http://thepyre.org
> http://thevirtualcampfire.org
> http://technomadic.tumblr.com
>
> `~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`
>  "Technology is the campfire around which we tell our stories."
> -Laurie Anderson
>
> "Storytelling reveals meaning without committing the error of defining it."
>  -Hannah Arendt
>
> "To define is to kill. To suggest is to create."
> -Stéphane Mallarmé
> ~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`
>
> On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Matthew Senate <mattsenate at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> David,
>>
>> I understand what you're sharing about the experiences you have had with
>> people seeking voice and space in this project.
>>
>> However, I do not believe that flipping bits from public to private on
>> our email list archives will change that. I think Jordan's implementation
>> of a *helpdesk@* list (private archives to protect senders), and
>> leveraging clear public-facing, private (or semi-private), and alternative
>> communication channels (e.g. physical "anonymous comment box" by the front
>> door) are all *excellent* ways to approach these situations. We should
>> set up a *whistleblower at lists.omnicommons.org
>> <whistleblower at lists.omnicommons.org> *or *leaks at lists.omnicommons.org
>> <leaks at lists.omnicommons.org>* for instance!
>>
>> Historically, I have had more than a handful of conversations with folks
>> (some active members, other allies elsewhere in the world) who have used
>> and read the public archives of the sudo room email lists for their
>> information and for all of our benefit. We depend on this form of
>> participation to continue to exist. Further, we link to these discussions
>> in our email threads, on the wiki, and elsewhere.
>>
>> We must be *clear* about what is *public* versus *private,* but we
>> should challenge ourselves to make more communications available (indexed
>> by google also means we can link to it on the public web... the structure
>> of the web that was valuable *even before *search engines and the
>> information search engines use to crawl content and formulate rankings,
>> etc). We can also encourage search engines not to index this content to
>> keep it unsearchable, but probably the folks who typically want to search
>> it will be us and our community.
>>
>> To me, a good number of our problems right now correspond to *access*,
>> *transparency*, and *engaging new participants*. In light of these
>> issues, there is a clear direction for us to travel in which we should
>> value *"open, public discourses over closed, proprietary processes"* as
>> well as *"access and transparency over exclusivity"* in order to *"solve
>> real problems over hypotheticals, while respecting visions of the future"*
>> - https://sudoroom.org/wiki/Articles_of_Association#Values
>>
>> All three of us on this thread so far are sudo room members, what do you
>> all think about these values I've shared?
>>
>> // Matt
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 2:11 PM, yar <yardenack at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 12:51 PM, David Keenan <dkeenan44 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > I would like to help you welcome new members - if I can get those
>>> notices, I
>>> > will reply and copy you and Jenny.
>>>
>>> We already have a list called "helpdesk" which is for receiving
>>> private emails about the omni, so if we all CC helpdesk then others
>>> know what's being done and how it's being done. Perhaps if we notice
>>> subscriptions from somebody new, we can forward the request to
>>> helpdesk!
>>>
>>> Anybody interested in being part of the general email liaison /
>>> outreach team, please subscribe. :)
>>>
>>> https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/helpdesk
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> discuss mailing list
>>> discuss at lists.omnicommons.org
>>> https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/discuss
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at lists.omnicommons.org
>> https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20141004/1b91dfbc/attachment.html>