[mpyne]

I'm unhappy that Levison's overbearance on email caused Pamela Jones to quit Groklaw. Ordinarily these are exactly the kinds of cases PJ would be able to demonstrate some of her expertise on, by explaining how longstanding legal principles apply to problems in the tech sector.

She was never a coder though, and so her expertise on tech was limited to what was explained to her. I don't think Levison was making his claims about all emails everywhere being read by the goons at Minitrue in order to scare PJ in particular, but that was the net effect.

[ballard]

Her quitting was like a superhero retiring.

[chimeracoder]

> I'm unhappy that Levison's overbearance on email caused Pamela Jones to quit Groklaw.

Can you explain?

I may be wrong, but my misunderstanding is that Groklaw shut down because there is no way of knowing whether or not the privacy has been compromised.

In other words, this incident revealed information that was already true; Groklaw shut down in the light of the new knowledge, but not because the previously-private communication was suddenly vulnerable.

[mpyne]

> I may be wrong, but my misunderstanding is that Groklaw shut down because there is no way of knowing whether or not the privacy has been compromised.

And that was true since POP3 was invented. When you're sending the digital equivalent of postcards to each other then you can never know if your privacy has been compromised.

It's unclear to me what PJ really thought about the privacy of email before Levison, but what is clear is that Levison and SilentCircle's hysterical actions are what convinced PJ to close up shop.