[Noisebridge-discuss] Should NB mirror WikiLeaks?

[Matt Joyce]

How is wikileaks relevant to the mission of noisebridge?
On Dec 7, 2010 3:51 PM, "Sai" <sai at saizai.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 5:12 PM, Andy Isaacson <adi at hexapodia.org> wrote:
>> That's not what your email said.  If you'd said "hey I'd like to donate
>> a mirror to noisebridge, here's the IP" that'd be cool.  "Should NB do
>> $FOO" sounds like code for "somebody else should do $FOO for the group".
>
> I honestly don't understand what you're seeing here. Could you name a
> specific action that you think I'm demanding some individual perform,
> or some resource I want from an individual?
>
> AFAICT all I am suggesting (or asking for, if you prefer to put it
> less neutrally) is
> a) group permission to use wikileaks.noisebridge.net
> b) group permission to use a NB-owned server to host it (and to follow
> the policy in https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/MemoryHole about that
> hosting account)
> c) an admin willing to enter the server commands needed OR to give me
> the privilege to enter 'em myself
>
> Why use group resources? 'cause as an individual I can't afford to
> host a high traffic site, reach as many people, or have the same
> amount of legal and community defense. This is hardly (I think) a case
> of wanting to exploit group resources for *personal* gain.
>
> (Will I do it myself anyway? Yes, same as others are. But it won't
> make more than minor incremental impact.)
>
> Aside from (c) - a single sudoers command is hardly a huge imposition
> on your time - what do you think I'm asking someone else to "do"?
>
> If there isn't something, how would you suggest I phrase these
> requests for permission—which your email seemed to agree with—in such
> a way that it doesn't come off as demanding in the way that it has to
> you?
>
>>> Please stop mischaracterizing what I say, like with here where you act
>>
>> Hey, I just call 'em like I see 'em.
>
> And I appreciate the candor.
>
> But it'd be nice if you tried to also be a bit more empathic; I'm also
> pretty blunt but I try hard to accurately represent the views of
> people I disagree with. I hope you would call me on it if I
> mischaracterized *you*; AFAIK I have not done so.
>
>> OK, what IP would you like to point at?
>
> If the answer to "can we use a NB server to host it" part of this
> discussion is "no", then I'll let you know once mine is ready. It's
> currently downloading the torrents while I look into how to set up a
> scp/rsync only chroot securely. (I sorta vaguely know about jails but
> have never have had to actually do it.)
>
>>> And even if I could do it myself, and did, I would still think it's
>>> something that should be discussed, because it has potentially serious
>>> political and legal entailments.
>>
>> Sure, that's a discussion I'm fine with having.
>
> … I'm a bit perturbed that that'd even be in question. I certainly
> didn't mean to imply you were advocating censorship of it.
>
>
> FWIW: the fact that we're concerned about *bogus* legal reprecussions
> for an action we (so far) seem to all support in principle (or at
> least be neutral to) is the very definition of "chilling effects".
>
> I kinda thought that, as expressed on that MemoryHole page, we'd have
> the chutzpah to stand up to that. Not to cross into things that are
> actually illegal that we still approve of (I'm sure y'all can think of
> some of those) and thus ought not do as an organization, but to simply
> do what we believe to be right.
>
> - Sai
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20101207/fac4eef8/attachment-0003.html>