4 ms·

It's clear they didn't have expertise to do it, and I'm tired of reading people that know way more looking down at others over it and assuming they don't want t

It's clear they didn't have expertise to do it, and I'm tired of reading people that know way more looking down at others over it and assuming they don't want to comply. If they hiding something and malicious, the end result wouldn't have been to send way too much, but I don't see the author realizing this fast enough.

dnbgfher 8y ago
I'm not sure why you think the only malicious response would be to send over too little. It's a common enough scene in TV shows and the like where a malicious actor attempts to hide incriminating information in a sea of irrelevant information.
sanotehu 8y ago
Agreed. You're putting an overworked, underpaid public servant in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario. They complied with a far reaching request and got told their response was too far reaching? I'd quit my job if faced with a legal minefield like that, especially one not actually related to the job itself
- setr 8y ago
  Presumably this should be considered overreaching should be considered an important though: if there’s an authorization process in play, then more information has been given out than the public servant was actually authorized to hand out. If me as a citizen starts receiving sensitive information despite only being authorized to receive insensitive info, that could easily become a significant security breach. In fact, a known security check was actually bypassed in this case: the email review, reserved for the content of the email, causing the whole problem in the first place. It seems to me imperative that they actually deliver up to the amount authorized. Ideally exactly the amount, but never more.
- hnaccy 8y ago
  >They complied with a far reaching request and got told their response was too far reaching? He requested metadata and they sent actual email content, kind of a big difference there.
- Aeolun 8y ago
  Why do you think complying with these requests is not part of the job for Seattle IT? I would think it’s pretty cool to retrieve this massive amount of data that I wouldn’t otherwise get to play with.
Johnny555 8y ago
I'm tired of reading people that know way more looking down at others over it What do you mean "people that know way more"? He made a simple request for email metadata, spelled out each field he was interested in. He didn't tell the city how to do it. Are you saying that the author knew more about how to retrieve email metadata than the actual Seattle IT staff that administer the mail system? And what bothers you most is that the author knew more about how to fulfill his request than the people that run the mail system?
anigbrowl 8y ago
If they hiding something and malicious, the end result wouldn't have been to send way too much Wrong. Dumping a vast pile of irrelevant information at the last possible moment to obscure something embarrassing is a very common tactic in commercial litigation.

dnbgfher 8y ago

I'm not sure why you think the only malicious response would be to send over too little. It's a common enough scene in TV shows and the like where a malicious actor attempts to hide incriminating information in a sea of irrelevant information.

sanotehu 8y ago

Agreed. You're putting an overworked, underpaid public servant in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario. They complied with a far reaching request and got told their response was too far reaching? I'd quit my job if faced with a legal minefield like that, especially one not actually related to the job itself

setr 8y ago
Presumably this should be considered overreaching should be considered an important though: if there’s an authorization process in play, then more information has been given out than the public servant was actually authorized to hand out. If me as a citizen starts receiving sensitive information despite only being authorized to receive insensitive info, that could easily become a significant security breach. In fact, a known security check was actually bypassed in this case: the email review, reserved for the content of the email, causing the whole problem in the first place. It seems to me imperative that they actually deliver up to the amount authorized. Ideally exactly the amount, but never more.
hnaccy 8y ago
>They complied with a far reaching request and got told their response was too far reaching? He requested metadata and they sent actual email content, kind of a big difference there.
Aeolun 8y ago
Why do you think complying with these requests is not part of the job for Seattle IT? I would think it’s pretty cool to retrieve this massive amount of data that I wouldn’t otherwise get to play with.

Johnny555 8y ago

I'm tired of reading people that know way more looking down at others over it What do you mean "people that know way more"? He made a simple request for email metadata, spelled out each field he was interested in. He didn't tell the city how to do it. Are you saying that the author knew more about how to retrieve email metadata than the actual Seattle IT staff that administer the mail system? And what bothers you most is that the author knew more about how to fulfill his request than the people that run the mail system?

anigbrowl 8y ago

If they hiding something and malicious, the end result wouldn't have been to send way too much Wrong. Dumping a vast pile of irrelevant information at the last possible moment to obscure something embarrassing is a very common tactic in commercial litigation.