[IAEP] irc logs

Martin Dengler martin at martindengler.com
Fri Feb 6 04:23:12 EST 2009

On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 12:09:27PM +0545, Ties Stuij wrote:
> >> This for a public channel that can be
> >> tracked by anyone if she/he wishes, so I don't really understand the
> >> privacy-concerns.
> >
> > It's the difference between a conversation one might have with someone
> > in a library where I know it's recorded, or don't.  I would behave
> > differently, and I like the knowledge that someone has to care enough
> > to see the backlog or save good parts of it:
> Privacy concerns are valid argument of course.

My concern is just that gratuitous (and I think this case is clearly
gratuitious, but that point is so meta I've lost interest) logging is
something I personally think should be passively discouraged.  But I
think we've discovered the consensus (the opposite) and so I'm happy
to move on.

> But do debate my conclusion if you think the general gist of my
> conclusion is wrong in your view.

To be clear, I agree with your latest conclusion.

> Sorry if it seems I now oversimplify the discussion, but in my view
> the numbers above do seem to reflect people's opinions pretty ok,
> and framing a conclusion like this at this point is the only way I
> see to ever reaching an actual decision.

Thanks for doing it.

> I myself underestimated reality a bit. I thought logging would be
> pretty much a non-issue, and I see now that reaching an actual
> conclusion through a mailing-list over a topic like this is a pretty
> hard thing to do. Will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Indeed.  Thanks for persevering though :).

> /Ties


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20090206/1c7960ad/attachment-0001.pgp 

More information about the IAEP mailing list