IRC Logs

It has quite recently come to my attention that an IRC log of mine has been posted in a public area without my permission, specifically here.

In accordance to the long standing moderation policy I would request that such log be removed from these forums immediately. Thank you.

Blue Wolf is, I think, quite correct and it sets a dangerous precedent if we suddenly decide that private IRC logs can be publicly posted without consent.

Even during the Pixiedance Wars I was careful to get Insane Power's consent before posting a conversation that took place between him and me.

Blue Wolf is charged with no crime, so this is not evidence in a trial or any such thing. I am amazed that it has been put on public display.

However, I am not root admin, so over to Grosse.

Flem, things have changed, and BW contributed to it by conducting official govenrmental business solely on IRC. Second, while #tnp used to include an explicit caution that the IRC logs couldn't be reproduced elsewhere without the consent of all of the participants, they don't appear to have such a policy now.
I was quoted IRC excerpts more than once as to forum tasks during his term as he refused topost things on the forums to confirm these act, even when asked.
I've responded to it in the thread in the RA Lobby area in more detail, but the bottom line is that if total consent is going to be needed for IRC logs as they are for PM (with exceptions), then we'll have to work up a new forum policy appendix to cover it. We can't expect to have official government transactions taking place on IRC or elsewhere on the one hand, and insist that it's confidential and non postable in public areas here on the other.

That claim is absolute bullshit and you're just using it as an excuse to advance your own interests and nothing more.

I guess what I don't get is why did the current delegate ask permission to post logs between him and (at the time) a person who had couped a feeder, but did not merit the same policy for a former delegate of The North Pacific? Should not a former delegate be treated at least on the same level as someone who was at the time couping a region?

Grosseschnauzer's comment does indeed not make sense.

I posted the logs believing I was covered by the regional security exception: turns out I was not quite covered. To fit the exception the thread has been moved to the RA Private Halls.

Since BW has admitted the logs in question as evidence in an appeal as part of the defense, it would tend to cancel out any complaint about the logs having been posted in the first place?

I'm not on trial.

Todd McCloud:

I guess what I don't get is why did the current delegate ask permission to post logs between him and (at the time) a person who had couped a feeder, but did not merit the same policy for a former delegate of The North Pacific? Should not a former delegate be treated at least on the same level as someone who was at the time couping a region?

Click to expand...

I generally follow the policy religiously.

In this case however, I did not submit this log to the forum, originally. I just copied it from one part to the other, assuming (in error) that that would certainly be okay. How exactly would you suggest I go about asking permission from Blue Wolf to post a log of him talking to Hileville, anyway?

And I think that precisely because Blue Wolf has been trusted by a good number of people in this region, this absolutely needed to be public knowledge.

With every post you show that the disclosure of the Log was politically motivated against Blue Wolf. That is fine - but I think it is important to be clear that this was "my interest" rather than "public interest".

However, I think you underestimate the TNP public. You mistake a belief that BW (or others) should not face discrimination with support for that person.

If the Regional Assembly were ever allowed to vote on Security Council members, and if Blue Wolf were allowed to stand for that election, would I vote for him? No. Do I believe he should be allowed to stand? Yes.

Concern that the Oligarchy move to block certain individuals in this region does not equate to support for those individuals.

The publishing of this log sticks in the craw of many becuase it was just a little too obvious and overt. Next time the Oligarchy wishes to smear someone, please make it a little more subtle.

Grosseschnauzer:

Flem, things have changed, and BW contributed to it by conducting official govenrmental business solely on IRC. Second, while #tnp used to include an explicit caution that the IRC logs couldn't be reproduced elsewhere without the consent of all of the participants, they don't appear to have such a policy now.
I was quoted IRC excerpts more than once as to forum tasks during his term as he refused topost things on the forums to confirm these act, even when asked.
I've responded to it in the thread in the RA Lobby area in more detail, but the bottom line is that if total consent is going to be needed for IRC logs as they are for PM (with exceptions), then we'll have to work up a new forum policy appendix to cover it. We can't expect to have official government transactions taking place on IRC or elsewhere on the one hand, and insist that it's confidential and non postable in public areas here on the other.

Click to expand...

Government transactions should NOT take place on IRC, they should take place here on the forum, which is officially recognised as the main source of regional communications.

Eluvatar:

And I think that precisely because Blue Wolf has been trusted by a good number of people in this region, this absolutely needed to be public knowledge.

Click to expand...

So it was personally motivated? You don't believe people should be allowed to make mistakes? If I recall, didn't you once belong to The Lexicon, a former enemy of TNP? I'm sure I could find interesting bits of information about your time there you wouldn't want shared publicly here as well.

Blue Wolf II:

Eluvatar:

And I think that precisely because Blue Wolf has been trusted by a good number of people in this region, this absolutely needed to be public knowledge.

Click to expand...

So it was personally motivated? You don't believe people should be allowed to make mistakes? If I recall, didn't you once belong to The Lexicon, a former enemy of TNP? I'm sure I could find interesting bits of information about your time there you wouldn't want shared publicly here as well.

Click to expand...

no I have no personal animus against you.

I think I've already shared everything of interest from that period.

And your argument would make more sense if you believed the plot to have been a mistake, and I don't think you do, indeed you have argued just the other day that you were morally obligated to plan such a civil war.

The plot also didn't go forward, nor did it involve invaders, as you claimed without supporting evidence, nor was it to install a dictatorship, nor was any of it illegal, nor was its release truly in the name of "public interest". It was "interesting" I'll give you that, but not something everyone needed to know. Shall I be publishing all my logs now publicly or just the interesting ones? The mundane ones we can filter out.

where we disagree, understandably, is that I think everyone did need to know this.

You also used your position to post that log and keep it up, you realize that. Since this was a Political act, considering that information no longer posed a security threat and was released specifically to keep me from ever becoming a Security Council member, I do believe that is using your position for personal gain, which is an oath violation.

flemingovia:

With every post you show that the disclosure of the Log was politically motivated against Blue Wolf. That is fine - but I think it is important to be clear that this was "my interest" rather than "public interest".

However, I think you underestimate the TNP public. You mistake a belief that BW (or others) should not face discrimination with support for that person.

If the Regional Assembly were ever allowed to vote on Security Council members, and if Blue Wolf were allowed to stand for that election, would I vote for him? No. Do I believe he should be allowed to stand? Yes.

Concern that the Oligarchy move to block certain individuals in this region does not equate to support for those individuals.

The publishing of this log sticks in the craw of many becuase it was just a little too obvious and overt. Next time the Oligarchy wishes to smear someone, please make it a little more subtle.

Click to expand...

Flem, I think what you said reflects my sentiments. Respect for others? Nah. I'll just go ahead and post it. I messed up as to where I posted it? Ooops. My bad everyone. I'll just move it to a private area and you all can pretend you never saw it. Problem solved, we're all good.

Like I said, had this been the exact opposite as far as who posts logs about who, we would've encountered an entirely different situation.

Blue Wolf II:

You also used your position to post that log and keep it up, you realize that. Since this was a Political act, considering that information no longer posed a security threat and was released specifically to keep me from ever becoming a Security Council member, I do believe that is using your position for personal gain, which is an oath violation.

Click to expand...

That is a serious misrepresentation of the issue.

I gain nothing by releasing that information. It would be far safer for me, politically, to keep quiet such matters and simply quietly inform various people I find trustworthy, and work in a network like that to protect TNP. This is how things were done in 2005-2007, to my knowledge.

I don't want to go that way because I think that the regional public should not be paternalistically guided, but should be given the actual information. I think that such a security network is fundamentally dangerous to democracy as it is not only apt to introduce systematic bias but also to support a pattern of politically promoting primarily the members of the network.

It harms me, politically, to be a locus of this kind of controversy. This is not rocket science. There is a reason why attacks on opponents are generally performed by surrogates. Then again, you are not my political opponent.

It does not impact my political power, position, or popularity if you are on the Security Council. I released this relevant information because I believe it is essential for people to make that informed decision, because I believe that appointing someone to the Security Council who so recently planned to overthrow this very constitutional government would be bad for regional security.

I can see how one could consider regional security a political matter, just as one could consider war a continuation of politics by other means. But this has nothing to do with my personal politics viz-a-viz TNP. If unibot were to suggest to people that perhaps the government of TNP should be forcibly overthrown to make way for something else (more directly democratic perhaps) I expect I and others would react exactly the same way.

I think that your sitting on the Security Council, given that I have no reason to believe you no longer think that overthrowing the constitutional government in a coup d'etat would be fun and great, would be a ticking time bomb. You could accumulate influence until you felt ready to act, and then, perhaps when there are fewer active Security Council members, attain the Delegacy and pull a Coup D'etat, now with the power to actually ban the likely influential opponent nations. My opposition to such an eventuality should not be a contested political point. It is the essence of democracy that we agree to abide by the consensus, and democracy is a fundamental value of TNP.

That this is something it is my duty to seek to forestall one way or another, I think is self-evident. Regardless of your membership in the same political party as I, regardless of our having often agreed on the necessity of reform, regardless of your service against Durkadurkiranistan II. I feel I would be failing to meet my oath if I allowed you to join the SC without revealing my reservations and the reasons for them.