Striking the Right Balance between Privacy and Public Protect ion

[Dave Bird]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article <200210261159.MAA10137@clw.cs.man.ac.uk>, Charles Lindsey
<chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk> writes
>       On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 03:16:51 +0100
>       Dave Bird <dave@xemu.demon.co.uk> said...
>
>> 
>> In article <200210251401.PAA00253@clw.cs.man.ac.uk>, Charles Lindsey
>> <chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk> writes
>> >No, the information received regarding traffic data is nowhere as
>> >sensitive as the actual content of intercepted messages, and therefore
>> >there is no need for such high levels of vetting. Indeed, it should need
>> >no more than the general principle of confidentiality that all public
>> >servants are expected to observe.
>> 
>>  Really.  So details of your
>>  (a) health details including sexual health, mental health, and
>>  material which you choose not to disclose to your employer
>> 
>> 
>>  It is astonishing that you think this is so.  
>
>No, I am merely saying that the fact that you communicated with a
>psychiatrist/whatever is nowhere near as sensitive as what you said to
>him.

 With respect, this just ain't so.  Especially the fact that you 
 communicated with the Workers Revolutionary Party, a gay 
 switchboard, a particular police station (from which it can be 
 deduced you are a potential witness in the case concerned and
 can be targeted with death threats to shut you up), an 
 employment agency, a regulatory agency, etc, has potential
 for blackmail or harassment against you.  

- -- 
   ^-^-^-@@-^-;-^   http://www.xemu.demon.co.uk/
        (..)__u     news:alt.smoking.mooses

       happy as a clam at high tide -. <_" .-._.-.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1

iQA/AwUBPbrKfnpGxv7MBb4WEQKXLwCg1CZMyj0Y9/0pJ9VA0D6jxlHz23QAn2T3
X9FQb3/PrxtlODIeRj/DJwD1
=QDK3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----