A user has written to trustees@ requesting removal of their mail in the gentoo-dev archives, because of the footer: Mail: > I wanted to forward this to the privacy division of Gentoo.org, as the below > web page is hosting my information along with connotations that I find > completely inappropriate. My first attempt to send an email to privacy > did not go through as the email address appears to be down. > > This web reference has created a serious amount of anxiety for me > very recently. It is hurting my family and could have potentially > caused a significant amount of financial distress for me > in the recent past. I was unaware of the nature of the content > until now. > > I implore you to please help me remove this information from the > internet, or I will have to pursue legal counsel on the matter. > https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/f3392e557e0a1cd356ba9bd752a81407 The footer in question: > Using the internet as it was originally intended... > for the further research of pornography and pipebombs.
More interesting, the same person has asked for removal of a really old FreeBSD post as well. original post: https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2004-June/050247.html removal request: https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2017-April/277219.html I have emailed him to ask for clarification of what text he which removed.
<trustee hat /> Fine by me.
robbat2, do you mind updating this bug with your proposed solution so we (trustees ) can ack it?
Further correspondence of 2017/12/27 >On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 02:15:29AM +0000, Darrick Uwins wrote: >> To whom it may concern, >> >> I wanted to forward this to the privacy division of Gentoo.org, as the >> below web page is hosting my information along with connotations that >> I find completely inappropriate. My first attempt to send an email to >> privacy did not go through as the email address appears to be down. >Thank you for reporting that, I have fixed the privacy address to work >again (it does go to the trustees@ group and others, so no need to >directly include them, they will get it still with just >infra-privacy@gentoo.org). > >> This web reference has created a serious amount of anxiety for me very >> recently. It is hurting my family and could have potentially caused a >> significant amount of financial distress for me in the recent past. I >> was unaware of the nature of the content until now. >> >> I implore you to please help me remove this information from the >> internet, or I will have to pursue legal counsel on the matter. >> https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/f3392e557e0a1cd356ba9bd752a81407 >For the record, can you please specifically clarify which part of your >mail text you believe needs to be removed? > >The other link on our archive for the thread is: >https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/813e86b4f59d88242f4f475fec996aa7 >[gentoo-dev] Hello... - gentoo-dev - Gentoo Mailing List Archives<https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/813e86b4f59d88242f4f475fec996aa7> >archives.gentoo.org >The Gentoo Mailing List Archives > > > >Both mails do exist in other public archives, as they date back to 2002, >such as MARC. >https://marc.info/?l=gentoo-dev&m=102182848430610&w=2 >https://marc.info/?l=gentoo-dev&m=102182848430611&w=2 >We do not have an control over other archives of the mailing list, as it >is & was fully public since it's inception.
Further correspondence of 2017/12/28, 01:03:11 UTC: >On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 11:32:12PM +0000, Darrick Uwins wrote: >> Hi Robin. Thank you for your response and thank you for providing those additional web references. >> >> >> "For the record, can you please specifically clarify which part of your >> mail text you believe needs to be removed?" >[snip, discussion specifically identifying the signature in response to >the original mail. The adjacency of the signature could be >misinterpreted as having been written by Darrick Uwins.] > >> Jared works or worked for Gentoo. It is Gentoo's information that I >> find inappropriate. It is Gentoo's information that serves to hurt. >> Therefore, Gentoo should take responsibility and remove it. >jhhudso became a Gentoo developer on 2002/03/29, the email is dated >2002/02/10, so he wasn't a Gentoo developer yet. Even if it was later, >it does not comprise a 'work' relationship, as we're an open-source >non-profit, and everybody volunteers (not enough money for even >part-time positions). > >The Infrastructure team has strived hard to not exert any editorial or >censorial control over content outside clear mistakes & deliberate >malicious content (malware, spam), but the team does recognize that >extenuating circumstances exist, would like to reach fair balance >between outcomes & openness. >Since it's not your post that you want removed, but in fact somebody >else's, this isn't even remotely covered by the privacy policy. Under >copyright law, jhhudso has ownership over the email he wrote, possibly >including the section that quotes you. > >Here's what I propose as a course of action: > >- The Gentoo trustees should contact jhhudso and get his permission to > replace the signature of this instance of the email. >- The signature will be replaced by a public record that it has been > removed, probably by linking to a bug. >- If jhhudso cannot be reached after 2 weeks, the default will be to remove it. >- If jhhudso objects, the signature will have a clear link/text > prepended. > >This action WILL be published openly, as per the transparency goals of >the Foundation. >
Further correspondence of 2017/12/28 02:29:24 +0000, from Uwins: >Hi Robin. Thanks for your reply. > > >Yes, that sounds fine. However, I'm not sure Jared understands what is at > stake here, and how it is affecting my family. What I would like to see, > is for the post to be entirely removed so that my livelihood is not > under threat and I can move on with my life. > >I have also started discussions with Marc.info. > > >Thank you very much, > >Darrick j Uwins >
2017/12/28 email to jhhudso: >Hi Jared, > >Hopefully this email found a valid address for you. This is an issue >we're attempting to resolve not later than 2018/Jan/09. > >A long time ago, on 2002/Feb/10, you replied to a user on the gentoo-dev list: >https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/f3392e557e0a1cd356ba9bd752a81407 >This was about 2 months before you became a Gentoo developer. > >There's a concern now (nearly 16 years later), that your email signature >at the time has been wrongly attributed to the user, and it causing them >problems. > >To that end, the Gentoo Infra team would like to replace the signature, >with your permission, and be transparent that it was replaced. > >The old signature: >> Using the internet as it was originally intended... >> for the further research of pornography and pipebombs. > >The proposed new signature: >> (signature removed by gentoo-infra, 2017/12/27, per bug ######) > >The public bug referenced will be a note that it was removed with your >permission, by email request of the user you responded to, as signed off >by the Gentoo Infrastructure team and the trustees of the Gentoo >Foundation.
Response from jhhudso: >Robin, > >You may censor the satirical quote. > >What problem was the quote causing Darrick Jason Uwins? What bug number will >include information about the update? > >Jared H.
The footer was changed in the underlying store in early January, but did not automatically propagate to the web version consistently. The footer is now correctly reflected in the web version, and this bug has been updated with the email traffic. Marking bug public as noted in the transparency conditions proposed to Uwins.
