Hello Robert.

26 May 04 07:36, you wrote to Malcolm Miles:

RB|> This is just another attempt to justify something that not many people
RB|> think justifiable or even practicable, Miles. Nobody in their right
RB|> mind is going to reveal sensitive personal information in a fido echo,
RB|> be it ZCC or anything else. And what's left is the give and take in
RB|> the ZCC, which helps others understand what's going on - and why.

RB|> You (plural now) do yourselves no favors by trying the keep something
RB|> like this secret, and engender a lot of unhealthy speculation about
RB|> "power politics". As I wrote elsewhere, the speculations are a good
RB|> deal worse than the reality.

RB|> The only possible justification I've seen was that of Janis, who was
RB|> worried that private telephone numbers and email addresses could
RB|> become public and presumably lead to a flood of calls and messages.
RB|> But anyone with a head on their shoulders - and certainly I class the
RB|> ZCs in that group - doesn't mention such things in a fido echo anyway,
RB|> since everyone knows even the "closed" ones aren't really closed...
RB|> there is always some way to get around that, and we must always assume
RB|> anything we write will become public sooner or later.

RB|> Renato is right on this call.

The ZCC echo has been private since it's inception.  Why all of a sudden do
you care now?  You didn't before this.

Not really.

Robert

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-RuneKeep