[pp.int.general] PP-Leaders list update reminder

[Nuno Cardoso]

On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Antonio Garcia <ningunotro at hotmail.com>wrote:

>  What does not make sense is the fact that the list has been set up and
> operated under a known set of restrictions, being a closed list being one
> of them. All that has been said assumed those restrictions would apply, and
> perhaps things that would not have been mentioned under other conditions
> have been disclosed there.
>
> You can not change those conditions now and make everything public.
>

I agree with Antonio, if one thing was supposed to have a certain audience,
that can't change suddenly making everything public. It could even put some
people in harm's way for just participating in such a list.


> Not without barring everyone from trusting you again with any kind of
> information that should not go public before the one providing it decides
> so.
>

Precisely, if one says a channel is secure from those that would do harm to
the pirate movement and suddenly it is made public, those that may be
persecuted for being pirate activists will never trust a "secure" channel
again.

Imagine how difficult it would become for journalists if nobody trusted
> off-the-record and embargo to be respected... and abide by what is
> necessary.
>

True, that is why the protection of sources is so important for
journalists. Imagine that wikileaks now said "Hey, remember that secure
email channel where you sent us the leaks? Screw that, we are making it and
it's logs public now! Ha Ha"

You do not seem to understand it is at all impossible to have short, mid
> and long term strategies if you can not conceal anything from your
> opponents and adversaries... then all you can do is day to day improvising
> at the level the least intelligent of your allies can understand.
>

Totally agree. In PP-PT we once planned an action against a videoclub
association that announced they would sent the attorney general 1000
complaints per month of filesharing along with collected IP addresses. We
made a complaint of our own denouncing them for illegally collecting IP
addresses without permission and filled it on the same day with the
attorney general. We hijacked their media attention, got an instant influx
of new members and stopped them where they stood, because they didn't file
any more complaints on the following months. We could only do so because we
discussed this in the internal affairs part of our forum and not on the
public part. We couldn't even respond publicly to some angry public
posts against that videoclub association in our open forum because it would
reveal our strategy and would probably ruin it.


> Very poor strategy.
>

Indeed.


> Without trusting each other, in the sense that you do not need to know
> everything to be sure the other is acting to the best of his ability to
> further the common goal, we will get nowhere.
>
> Distrust will keep ruining every effort.
>
> Total transparence = total lack of trust.
>

I wouldn't be so extreme, total transparency in affairs that don't require
an hidden strategy against PP enemies, or that don't put peoples lives at
risk in tough countries, is indeed a good thing. On the other special
cases, a mix of temporary secrecy before an action with a total
transparency follow up after the action, or the permanent protection of
some people is the wise way to go.


> And even with the total transparence, achieving anything becomes really
> impossible, under the present circumstances.
>

Well, like I said above, it really depends of what one is trying to achieve
and if there are PP enemies that can benefit from the information, so I
would't go to that extreme :)


> Antonio.
> PP-ES
>
>
> > Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2012 12:54:51 +0200
> > From: jakobsheep at gmail.com
> > To: pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> > Subject: Re: [pp.int.general] PP-Leaders list update reminder
>
> >
> > Good thinking Markus, I agree. And for the protection of their
> > informel conversations before "publishing" they still have their
> > private communications like E-mail to guarantee free thinking WITHOUT
> > restrictions and no criticism during the formation of an unique free
> > opinion !
> > So we could have and transparency and guaranteed privacy at the same
> time.
> > Does this make sense?
> >
> >
> > (in the forming of one's opinion
> > On 21 July 2012 08:19, Markus Drenger
> > <markus.drenger at piratenpartei-hessen.de> wrote:
> > >> [..]
> > >> It is used for the
> > >> delivering of important information only [..]
> > >> and not for discussions.
> > >> well as to enable PPI members to discuss sensible matters.
> > >
> > > discussion or no discussion, that's the question ;)
> > >
> > > if this list is full of important information, without spam or other
> > > troll threads, why not make this list world-readable?
> > > It would be a perfect source of information within ppi.
> > >
> > > Greetings,
> > > Markus
> > >
> > > ____________________________________________________
> > > Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> > > pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> > > http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
> > ____________________________________________________
> > Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> > pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> > http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20120722/e5a8a08d/attachment.html>