3 ms·

The most important news is in the subtitle - > Wisconsin has now joined several states with legislative proposals to make the process more transparent. Legisl

The most important news is in the subtitle - > Wisconsin has now joined several states with legislative proposals to make the process more transparent. Legislative or constitutional, good democratic government really needs limits on how much its supposed officials can do in secret.

rayiner 9mo ago
I agree, but what do you do when people are steeped in misinformation about water use and 5G signals?
- nemo 9mo ago
  You can tell them the truth, you could do public reach out, you could do a whole lot of things. Secret back-room deals deliberately hidden from the public who will (justifiably) assume maliciousness just creates even worse PR, less trust, and opens up avenues of corruption and abuse.
- hallway_monitor 9mo ago
  Doesn't everyone know that dihydrogen monoxide can be lethal? https://www.csun.edu/science/ref/humor/dhmo.html https://www.csun.edu/science/ref/humor/dhmo.html
  - hrimfaxi 9mo ago
    I can't believe this is still around. I remember printing this out to show my science teacher decades ago.
    - toast0 9mo ago
      Of course it's still around. They're still putting this crap in schools!
- throwhn1232 9mo ago
  Then you don’t get to build there, obviously. "Oh they’re too stupid to know better, let’s do what we want anyway" doesn’t seem like a sane solution, especially since the framework would be just as applicable to actually undesirable industrial plants and the like. They’re free to convince/bribe the people to allow it, not just push the poors around
newsclues 9mo ago
Secrecy needs a time limit.
- hrimfaxi 9mo ago
  Why do we allow municipalities to keep secrets in the first place? Unless it is personnel-related it should be public. If the communications happened on taxpayer funded equipment they should be open.
  - bloak 9mo ago
    They'll tell you it needs to be confidential "for commercial reasons". They always do.
    - 9dev 9mo ago
      Then you'll need to tell them democracy overrules commercial reasons.
    - hrimfaxi 9mo ago
      If corporate IT can read the CEO's emails despite commercial reasons I think we the people can see what our servants are doing with our equipment on our time.
  - petcat 9mo ago
    In a lot of cases, it's the only way that municipalities can submit bids for projects they want. And in the commercial space the bidding process is usually confidential. So it's just basically a requirement of public private partnership. Of course the municipality could just say that they don't want the project and they won't submit a bid. That's fine too.
    - buellerbueller 9mo ago
      Municipalities should not be bidding on corporate benefaction; this is exactly the opposite of how the relationship between the public and private sector should be.
imglorp 9mo ago
It's literally "we the people, by the people, for the people". Except for personnel/employee matters, state and local government should be completely transparent with secrets explicitly forbidden. Secret deals with corporations is corruption.
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]

rayiner 9mo ago

I agree, but what do you do when people are steeped in misinformation about water use and 5G signals?

nemo 9mo ago
You can tell them the truth, you could do public reach out, you could do a whole lot of things. Secret back-room deals deliberately hidden from the public who will (justifiably) assume maliciousness just creates even worse PR, less trust, and opens up avenues of corruption and abuse.
hallway_monitor 9mo ago
Doesn't everyone know that dihydrogen monoxide can be lethal? https://www.csun.edu/science/ref/humor/dhmo.html https://www.csun.edu/science/ref/humor/dhmo.html
- hrimfaxi 9mo ago
  I can't believe this is still around. I remember printing this out to show my science teacher decades ago.
  - toast0 9mo ago
    Of course it's still around. They're still putting this crap in schools!
throwhn1232 9mo ago
Then you don’t get to build there, obviously. "Oh they’re too stupid to know better, let’s do what we want anyway" doesn’t seem like a sane solution, especially since the framework would be just as applicable to actually undesirable industrial plants and the like. They’re free to convince/bribe the people to allow it, not just push the poors around

newsclues 9mo ago

Secrecy needs a time limit.

hrimfaxi 9mo ago
Why do we allow municipalities to keep secrets in the first place? Unless it is personnel-related it should be public. If the communications happened on taxpayer funded equipment they should be open.
- bloak 9mo ago
  They'll tell you it needs to be confidential "for commercial reasons". They always do.
  - 9dev 9mo ago
    Then you'll need to tell them democracy overrules commercial reasons.
  - hrimfaxi 9mo ago
    If corporate IT can read the CEO's emails despite commercial reasons I think we the people can see what our servants are doing with our equipment on our time.
- petcat 9mo ago
  In a lot of cases, it's the only way that municipalities can submit bids for projects they want. And in the commercial space the bidding process is usually confidential. So it's just basically a requirement of public private partnership. Of course the municipality could just say that they don't want the project and they won't submit a bid. That's fine too.
  - buellerbueller 9mo ago
    Municipalities should not be bidding on corporate benefaction; this is exactly the opposite of how the relationship between the public and private sector should be.

imglorp 9mo ago

It's literally "we the people, by the people, for the people". Except for personnel/employee matters, state and local government should be completely transparent with secrets explicitly forbidden. Secret deals with corporations is corruption.

deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]

deleted 9mo ago

[deleted]