The spin of "In the spirit of transparency, I am posting the emails of my governorship here" is a dick move. Not because emails weren't redacted, but because em

The spin of "In the spirit of transparency, I am posting the emails of my governorship here" is a dick move. Not because emails weren't redacted, but because emails were already public [1]. In practice he just created a better search interface, and worded the story in such a way that it sounded as if he was being "transparent" and "publicizing it" for the first time. Not really. Everything was already public and available - including email addresses, name, and even some SSNs. But if you pick his words apart, he didn't say anything wrong. Just misleading. As Feynman said [2]: In summary, the idea is to give all of the information to help others to judge the value of your contribution; not just the information that leads to judgement in one particular direction or another. The easiest way to explain this idea is to contrast it, for example, with advertising. Last night I heard that Wesson oil doesn't soak through food. Well, that's true. It's not dishonest; but the thing I'm talking about is not just a matter of not being dishonest; it's a matter of scientific integrity, which is another level. The fact that should be added to that advertising statement is that no oils soak through food, if operated at a certain temperature. If operated at another temperature, they all will--including Wesson oil. So it's the implication which has been conveyed, not the fact, which is true, and the difference is what we have to deal with. [1] https://sunburst.flgov.com/exchweb/bin/auth/owalogon.asp?url=https://sunburst.flgov.com/public&reason=2 https://sunburst.flgov.com/exchweb/bin/auth/owalogon.asp?url... user/pass: sunburst [2] From "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!", transcript here: http://neurotheory.columbia.edu/~ken/cargo_cult.html http://neurotheory.columbia.edu/~ken/cargo_cult.html