Re: PAB Consensus Call: Email archives

Kent Crispin (kent@songbird.com)
Fri, 9 Jan 1998 23:10:03 -0800

On Sat, Jan 10, 1998 at 04:29:09PM +1300, Peter Mott wrote:
> >What seems to be your embarrassment at the state of PAB is not without
> >foundation. Still, when you say that you don't want people to see how
> >confused and lacking of purpose we are, you are really just saying that you
> >don't want people to see us as we are.
>
> I am not embarrassed by the state or PAB, nor am I saying I dont want people
> to see us as we are.
>
> I am saying that making this known by way of publishing our correspondence
> is not going to change how we are, or encourage others to participate.
>
> So for theses reasons, why bother doing it?

Here are several reasons:

1. Because secrecy is bad public relations in and of itself.

2. Because we all agree that an archive is intrinsically
valuable, and it is obviously less trouble to operate one without
access controls than to create and maintain access controls.

3. Because, all other things being equal, it is better to be open
than to be closed.

4. Because, many feel for purely ethical reasons, any
organization that purports to manage a "public trust" should
operate, to the extent possible, in full view of the public. 

-- 
Kent Crispin, PAB Chair			"No reason to get excited",
kent@songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html