Sunshine Law Compliance

[Hileville]

As the new Cabinet we are tasked with having to declassify all Cabinet discussions.  I am going to setup a new archive system internally here forum wise and some cool tools that makes it easier to sort through them.  Any discussions that either started after or continued past 4/13/13 do not have to be disclosed.

 

As of right now I would suggest withholding all information about the Milograd coup until it can be evaluated more effectively.  I think enough time has passed for everything else to where we can start releasing info from 2003-2012 and look at the discussions from this year.

 

Thoughts?

[Hileville]

I have added a sensitive archive forum and moved the old Cabinet archive to this forum as well since only senior cabinet was able to see it anyway.  I guess what I am seeing with the sunshine law is a two level discussion system which includes non-sensitive discussions such as general meetings and then sensitive discussions like the Osiris thread.

 

I may be overthinking this law though so if you think it would be easier to do it another way please, please, please say so.

[Kris Kringle]

I'd have to take another look at the archives, but overall I think your idea is alright.

[Hileville]

I have moved the forum that will be used as the public archive in this area for now so we can do a mass declassification at once.  Going through the threads are 13 full pages with a handful of threads on a 14th.  I think we will have to look through all of them to make sure no personal info or IP addresses are in them and then start moving them into the public forum.  Myself, Escade, and Kris should all have the power to move these threads to the different forums.

[Southern Bellz]

I know there are some heated conversations in here about The Pacific where I basically say they can 'screw themselves' or something more colorful.  I would just try to make it so nothing like that gets out.

[Sandaoguo]

I think we need to develop an objective scorecard, because compliance with this law can easily become subject to political expedience. For instance, we shouldn't exclude something just because it's embarrassing or might cause some political problems for a current Cabinet member.

[Escade]

GR, the Sunshine Laws will be reworked and reintroduced to the Assembly this term. 

[Sandaoguo]

GR, the Sunshine Laws will be reworked and reintroduced to the Assembly this term. 

 

Regardless, we need objective standards, unless these changes completely nullify the intent of the law.

[Escade]

Sure, please work with Rebel on revising the laws. 

 

To be honest I'm a bit lost as to what exactly the next step is here.

[Kris Kringle]

Bumping this. We should start declassifying stuff, or writing the guidelines.

[Sandaoguo]

I've been going through threads on my own and recording them in a spreadsheet. I can share it with the Cabinet?

Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk

[Kris Kringle]

Sure, anything to advance this thread.

[Sandaoguo]

Here's the Google spreadsheet: [redacted]

 

(When reviewing this post in the next round of compliance, please redact that URL!)

 

e: After trying to develop some objective rules myself, I came to the conclusion that this project probably requires a more organic approach. I decided on a three-prong test: Does the thread reveal military secrets? Does the thread include personal information? Does the thread discuss ongoing strategies? The overall thing to keep in mind with the last one is that those strategies must be harmed by being revealed. However, I couldn't come up with any type of weighting system all by myself, which is why I included a "Comments" column, so we can discuss the relative impacts of public disclosure.

[Escade]

Thank you, GR.

 

I've gone through the threads and posts.

 

I've put (Esc, Good to go) for the ones I think are ready to be declassified. Otherwise, I've stated who I think needs to go through and give their opinion.

 

Kris, Rebel, Southern_Bellz, Awe, and CSS (Belschaft & Hile) please feel free to also go through and add your comments.  

 

I think cabinet majority agreeing that a thread is good to go i.e. be declassified would help then start the process of moving threads into declassification.

 

For military related threads, I think it is fine to wait a little longer for some of them. For example, I've been in talks with some of the people\organizations involved and would prefer to err on the side of caution. 

[Belschaft]

Speaking from a Security prospective, I would prefer that the threads relating to both the TSP and Osiris coups be withheld as they directly relate to the security of the region or our allies. Similarly, I would prefer that any mention of the status of our security scripts be redacted or omitted, as should be discussions of our intelligence assets or lack off. A lot of that stuff is semi-public knowledge as it is, but I would prefer not to reveal the actual details.

 

Confidential conversations with foreign officials also need to remain classified, otherwise people will be less willing to talk to us in the future. Both the logs of them and the commentary in regards to them should not be shared.

 

I've marked the various threads as either 'Good To Go' or 'REDACT'; in all I recommend keeping five threads classified, or at the very least heavily redacting them.

 

As for the Revolutionary Baddies List (officially 'The List of Revolutionary Traitors', unofficially the shit list) it can be found in the CSS archives. Mainly it's just a long list of disposable puppets owned by RPers.

[Southern Bellz]

Thanks for kicking the process of gr. I'll look through it this weekend.


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

[Awesomiasa]

I'm unofficially on LOA now, and I don't have access to my Mac, so I can only look through the threads starting tomorrow night when I get home from my grandma's.

[Sandaoguo]

Just some points:

 

• We need to actually explain how things affect security issue. We can't just say "Oh, this relates to the security of us/our allies." How would our various discussions on Osiris impact their security and our security? Should we consult with these regions if we believe publishing our discussions would affect them?
  
• When we come across logs of conversations with another region, we should contact that region and ask if it's okay to release those logs as part of this process, rather than assuming that the thread will forever be classified.
  
• How exactly are we going to actually release this stuff? How do we redact information for the public, while keeping the full thread intact for the Cabinet?
  
• The list of threads in the Google doc is only the beginning. There are a ton of threads left to go, so if all Cabinet members can go through and add threads from time to time, this would make things go much faster!
  

[Kris Kringle]

I don't think any of us would want them to remain classified anyway, but just for the sake of procedure I've included in the spreadsheet all threads from July 2003 until the Devonitians Coup. 

[Sandaoguo]

Remind me to buy you a drink if we ever happen upon each other in the real world.

[Kris Kringle]

I'll take your word for it.

 

It really was amazing. I've learned a lot about TSP's history from reading those threads.

[Rebel-topia]

Ive read through most, if not all of those threads... albeit over a longer period of time than you, Kris. Ill buy you a bottle!

 

Remind me to buy you a drink if we ever happen upon each other in the real world.

[Kris Kringle]

I suggest we declassify the earliest threads I reviewed and from the most recent ones, those that we all agreed were good to go?

[Escade]

Yes, Kris I think that's a good idea. 

 

For declassifying, do we just move the thread to the particular Archive for example FAO Cabinet Ministers to "Declassified Cabinet Archive?"

 

Then, for redaction of private TGs, how does that work? Just replaced with REDACTED?

[Kris Kringle]

Well?