[free-sklyarov] Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp?

[Jeme A Brelin]

On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Charles Eakins wrote:
> I'm not saying anything on this list that needs to be encrypted.

This is totally wrong-headed and I just want to take a moment to rebut.

You're implying that the ONLY REASON YOU WOULD ENCRYPT is if you had
something you wanted to HIDE.

We absolutely have to fight this kind of thinking.

When Ralph Nader was asked to disclose his personal finances for the
Presidential election (it's a requirement), he did so, but ONLY released
the information that is explicitly REQUIRED by law.  There are several
portions that are listed as optional or are somehow or other not strictly
enforcable as mandatory disclosure.  He refused with a statement like:

I refuse to provide this personal information as it is a clear violation
of my privacy and has no bearing on the position sought.

(again, or words to that effect)

I was VERY proud of him for that.  Not just because he stood up for
privacy, but because, of all people, he CLEARLY has nothing to hide (the
man gives 50% of all of his personal income to charity every year [the
maximum allowed without penalty] and uses most of the rest to found new
charities, keeping about thirty thousand dollars for personal
expenses) but still believes in our right to keep our private lives
private.

Honestly, I haven't been signing my messages to this group because I
thought there was a demime filter.

Huh.
J.
-- 
   -----------------
     Jeme A Brelin
    jeme at brelin.net
   -----------------
 [cc] counter-copyright
 http://www.openlaw.org