4 ms·

> Too often, when secret societies are brought up, many people have convinced themselves that secrecy must mean something nefarious is at play "Must" is an exa

by V-2 8y ago

> Too often, when secret societies are brought up, many people have convinced themselves that secrecy must mean something nefarious is at play "Must" is an exaggeration, but it is certainly a red flag. > Considering that the HN community is privacy centric and generally rejects the notion of “You don’t need privacy if you’ve got nothing to hide.” A society by definition isn't private in the sense used here. Noone complains about book clubs not listing all their members on the front door. A society, however, is an organization with the purpose of playing some role in the public life. You can't have it both ways.

toofy 8y ago
I understand where you’re coming from, but I’m not sure I agree that we can’t have it both ways. A book club can play just as much of a role in public life as the next club. We absolutely should be able to have it both ways, to choose whether or not we wish to list our book club members on the front door. This should be our choice. Maybe one week we wish to list attendees and another week choose not to list, why can’t we have it both ways? Why is it some random stranger’s business who attends my gatherings or what happens at my gatherings? Whether it’s a book club or a group of classmates drinking in my living room, why would random people feel like they’re entitled to invade my private space and dictate what I can and cannot do? I understand the very real concerns with power concentrating in the hands of a few, but I’m not sure attacking our ability to have private gatherings is the appropriate way to address power concentration. This type of attack is also very concerning when we consider how much off-base speculation, wild paranoia and hysteria tends to come along once people start speculating what’s happening behind my book club’s closed doors.
- V-2 8y ago
  > A book club can play just as much of a role in public life as the next club. Ultimately, everything does - butterfly effect and all that. But it doesn't always take the form of openly intending to make it happen - eg. lobbying for a specific law. If your organization is lobbying for something, but you don't want to disclose who exactly you are, people are perfectly within their rights to be sceptical, suspect conflicts of interest etc. It's the same as speaking out in public wearing a mask. You can, but sooner or later someone will question your reasons, at least if the subject you're on about makes it seem pertinent. > We absolutely should be able to have it both ways, to choose whether or not we wish to list our book club members on the front door. This should be our choice. It is. And it's also people's free (and understandable) choice to be suspicious of secret societies which define their purpose in terms of seeking power and influence.

by V-2 8y ago

toofy 8y ago

I understand where you’re coming from, but I’m not sure I agree that we can’t have it both ways. A book club can play just as much of a role in public life as the next club. We absolutely should be able to have it both ways, to choose whether or not we wish to list our book club members on the front door. This should be our choice. Maybe one week we wish to list attendees and another week choose not to list, why can’t we have it both ways? Why is it some random stranger’s business who attends my gatherings or what happens at my gatherings? Whether it’s a book club or a group of classmates drinking in my living room, why would random people feel like they’re entitled to invade my private space and dictate what I can and cannot do? I understand the very real concerns with power concentrating in the hands of a few, but I’m not sure attacking our ability to have private gatherings is the appropriate way to address power concentration. This type of attack is also very concerning when we consider how much off-base speculation, wild paranoia and hysteria tends to come along once people start speculating what’s happening behind my book club’s closed doors.

V-2 8y ago
> A book club can play just as much of a role in public life as the next club. Ultimately, everything does - butterfly effect and all that. But it doesn't always take the form of openly intending to make it happen - eg. lobbying for a specific law. If your organization is lobbying for something, but you don't want to disclose who exactly you are, people are perfectly within their rights to be sceptical, suspect conflicts of interest etc. It's the same as speaking out in public wearing a mask. You can, but sooner or later someone will question your reasons, at least if the subject you're on about makes it seem pertinent. > We absolutely should be able to have it both ways, to choose whether or not we wish to list our book club members on the front door. This should be our choice. It is. And it's also people's free (and understandable) choice to be suspicious of secret societies which define their purpose in terms of seeking power and influence.