RE: ATTN: Rollie Parish et al...

["Paul M. Wright, Jr." <pmwright@home.com>]

> >While I understand that the internet is not a "private" place, I guess I
> >expected more security of our comments we post on the list and
> >for them to be reserved for at least list subscribers. I understand now
that
> >this is not the case.
> >
> >Rollie, I am not sure this is such a good practice for the
> >service. I mean, many people speak their minds on the list regarding even
their
> >own programs, > >and I would think the comments one makes could fall into
the hands of
> >someone in a position to make judgement upon them. For instance,
> >perhaps an attorney for someone litigating against an air medical
provider.
> >

Jeff -

I can appreciate your discomfort at discovering just how public the contents
of a mailing list are but I think that it would not produce much benefit to
"secure" Flightmed against public view.
However, I do think that the public nature of the list is something many
people are not aware of and perhaps that could be more directly communicated
when a subscription is entered.

I do have a couple comments in regard to your concern.

First of all, you'll notice that many of the posts are unsigned or use only
an e-mail alias so there is a mechanism for people to maintain some degree
of anonymity if they so choose.  Sometimes that suggests caution and
sometimes it suggests cowardice, but it is a choice that is currently
available and many of the correspondents to the list do take advantage of
that opportunity (sometimes because their employers require it).  As I've
previously commented, however, the anonymity is convenient but not complete.

Second, the contents of this, or any other mailing list, are available by
subpoena and any attorney involved in medical malpractice issues is going to
have consultants who are going to be aware of resources like Flightmed.
Once the mail list is subpoenaed and the messages of interest are
identified, a computer forensics expert will crack the alias if necessary
and locate the party who has the information.  All without a need for a
public access search engine.  And all of your e-mail, sent to a list or not,
is discoverable if your employer or some other interested party wants to
offer a compelling reason to get a search warrant.  In a case awhile back
that I followed pretty closely, a judge signed a search order that sent
computer technicians out to copy the contents of the home computers of
certain airline employees who were believed to be involved in coordinating a
strike via e-mail.  I'd much rather they just use a search engine to find
what I've written.

Third, any time you supply information to a group of people (and especially
when there are members who are not entirely known to you), there is a risk
that what you say may come back to haunt you.  The people who would be
interested are probably already here as members of Flightmed and those who
are not members of Flightmed who might happen across what you've written
will be unlikely to have much interest.   Any air medical employee who is
hoping their employer doesn't monitor the Flightmed list is probably being
naive - as an employer, it would be useful to me to know what people are
saying about the company whether they are employees or not.  Not necessarily
to suppress bad news or cover flaws (although some of that does go on), but
more to understand points of view that may not be communicated through the
company's official channels.  It's kind of an electronic form of "management
by walking around".  Blinding the search engines wouldn't change that.

Finally, all your mail to and from the Flightmed list travels across the
Internet in clear text.  Any expectation of e-mail privacy on the Internet
(outside of encrypted messages) is unrealistic.

Speaking only for myself and with full knowledge of the power of the written
word, I have no problem with being accountable for what I write and it
doesn't really matter to me how it is discovered.  In fact, I see certain
advantages to those comments being available through a search engine.  My
concern is solely that of incorrect attribution to me of comments made by
others.

My own practice with comments in regards to persons and companies (as
opposed to comments on policies and practices) is to make those comments
only on request and only directly to the requesting party and not to the
list.  On rare occasions, comments that I have specifically asked to be kept
private have subsequently been posted to the list but I always keep that
risk in mind when composing a message.  And I've occasionally done it to
myself by pressing the Send key just a wee bit early when I was in a
particularly reactive mode.

So I think people need to be aware of the potential for public exposure and
keep that in mind as they are composing a message, whether it is going to
the list directly or may end up there by choice or by chance (just look at
the number of messages each year that were clearly NOT intended for the
list).  But I don't think that de-listing from the search engines would be
useful in the long run and I also don't think this can or should be a place
where private matters are discussed with an expectation that privacy will be
protected.

In fact, I think if members of the public were more aware of the some of the
issues we face, we might have an easier time solving those issues.  A
curtain around our discussions might only serve to increase suspicion that
we're hiding something.

regards!

paul

Paul M. Wright, Jr.
Mesa, AZ





_______________________________________________
Flightmed mailing list