[Noisebridge-discuss] [drama] Motion to block me from participating in press@

[Jacob Appelbaum]

On 10/07/2010 07:36 PM, Sai wrote:
> Added by Dr. J, for my having mentioned his handle in posting the link to
> the NBC story I helped coordinate:
> 
> https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/Meeting_Notes_2010_10_12

You de-anonymized him? How many times has that happened now?

> 
> Obviously I can't represent myself, and have no standing to do so anyway, so
> if you have an opinion on the matter either way, please attend.
> 
> I feel that my actions speak for themselves. I enjoy helping, believe I have
> done so effectively, have prior experience dealing with the press, and have
> otherwise had primarily positive reactions from my doing so. Also, much like
> other shit that needs to get done but often doesn't, not many people seem to
> want to bother actually calling back a reporter promptly, figuring out their
> angle and how to help them make a positive story.
> 

I think it's nice that you want to help with press stuff. Personally, I
think that it's a little weird that you're so eager but hey, lots of
people like CBT. ;-)

> I would like to continue helping out in this way, but it's up to y'all's
> consensus.

I pretty much reject the idea that you should be punished for
de-anonymizing someone who has done a very poor job of keeping his legal
name and his nick name unlinked. I generally reject the idea of formal
punishment for this kind of stuff; it's not like you're Rubin and
rubbing your dick on someone who asked to be left alone multiple times.
Or did you do that and this was just the final straw for Dr. Jesus?

Privacy by policy rarely works. These kinds of mistakes happen all the
time in the corporate world. Generally it happens in the form "we
promise to never tell" and often the end result is "oh shit, we got
hacked" - once that happens, the secret is generally out. I get the
feeling that you didn't have malicious intent - is that the case Sai?

I think it's really important to set expectations about pseudonyms and
we should try our best to be respectful about those constraints. It's
not cool to out someone, even if they're a white hat police affiliate of
some sort.

Or perhaps that is actually like gay Republicans trying to pass hate
legislation, one of the few corner cases where outing someone is
sometimes a reasonable tactic...

In any case - why don't you two just agree not to work with the press at
the same time? Or perhaps ensure that expectations are set in a really
straight forward manner? It seems like it would make future conflict
resolution quite straight forward...

All the best,
Jake