[WikiEN-l] Missed Opportunities to have avoided the Durova Case

[Anthony]

On Nov 29, 2007 3:41 PM, The Mangoe <the.mangoe at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/29/07, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > No, they're private. The words aren't synonyms.
>
> Private, however, implies secret-- or rather, that secrets are held
> within what is private. Otherwise, what's the point?
>
In the case of what's going on in the bedroom, I'd say secret has a
negative connotation, whereas private doesn't.

But in terms of mailing lists, I'd say secret implies that the
existence, name, and/or the topic of the mailing list is intentionally
kept from public knowledge, whereas private could mean either that the
contents of the mailing lists are kept from public knowledge and/or
the membership of the mailing list is not open to the public.

I'd also say that up until Durova's email was leaked, the
cyberstalking list was kept fairly secret, and the investigations list
was kept secret until even more recently (Guy wouldn't even reveal its
name), and a third list (which Guy alluded to previously) might even
still be a secret (have any details about it yet been revealed?).