develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from April 2021

Re: TPF Transparency Report

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Christian Walde
Date:
April 21, 2021 07:42
Subject:
Re: TPF Transparency Report
Message ID:
op.016vocwgydyjqt@xenbox.cihq
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 02:28:48 +0200, Darren Duncan <darren@darrenduncan.net> wrote:
> On 2021-04-20 3:11 p.m., Darren Duncan wrote:
>> On 2021-04-20 2:16 p.m., Tomasz Konojacki wrote:
>>> It is interesting that this "transparency" report doesn't include any
>>> details. It doesn't say who was investigated, it doesn't say what they
>>> did, and it doesn't say how it was determined that they're guilty. Very
>>> transparent.
>>
>> While on one hand I agree with you, on the other hand...
>>
>> I feel that being coy on naming any individual is exactly the right action.
>>
>> You see, actually naming someone publicly can easily constitute libel and have
>> much more serious consequences for both the named and the namer, as it can be
>> much more easily be found and traced by anyone.
>>
>> The way it was done, while vague, also can avoid a legal response for libel etc.
>>
>> The banned person can still publicly declare they are that person.
>>
>> That being said, its not a statement from TPF themselves, but the first p5p
>> email in this thread does explicitly name Matt Trout, and that is public.
>
> Further to what I said before...
>
> While not naming names is good, I feel that there should be a lot more detail on
> the alleged crime, where it is spelled out exactly what was said that was
> considered to be a problem.
>
> The main announcement can omit it but there should be a published supplement
> that has it.
>
> That way the community has the evidence upon which the verdict was reached,
> including its seriousness, and not just the highly subjective interpretations.

This is a double-edged sword.

In this particular a lot of people are asking about the specifics of the details found by CAT and their exact relation to the verdict, but primarily so in order to be able to counter them, given that a lot of people know they are incompatible with reality.

At the same time, due to the amount of detail that WAS given, the article was quickly being spread in a lot of places with mst's name (and occasionally mine) already attached, so the specific lack of detail failed to actually protect any privacy.

-- 
With regards,
Christian Walde

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About