[Foundation-l] Confidentiality agreement with FSF

[George Herbert]

On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I accept that if the other party insists on confidentiality, then we
> have no choice. That doesn't seem to be the case here. If it was that
> important to them, they would have put it in writing.
>

That is as a rule in business (and life) not true - people assume that
generally private discussions will stay so.

This request puts Erik in a bind, by asking him to release information that
he's by common courtesy bound to keep private.  I don't see the point of
that.

If you would like further transparency, the proper solution is to ask the
other parties (FSF, CC) if they are willing to put the conversations on the
public record.  I suspect that if they are, the WMF and Erik will have no
problem, though I don't speak for them in any way yadda yadda.

Requesting release from the parties whose privacy is presumably being
protected currently is the ethical and logical step forwards.


-- 
-george william herbert
george.herbert at gmail.com