| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 13.07.20 15:38l 1188 Lines 44035 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB15241
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V15 241
Path: IW8PGT<IZ3LSV<IR1UAW<IW2OHX<UA6ADV<CX2SA
Sent: 200713/1334Z @:CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM #:34879 [Salto] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB15241
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Back after a 2 yr absence (Armando Mercado)
2. Re: AMSAT Member Mailing list (Michelle Thompson)
3. Re: AMSAT Member Mailing list (David Swanson)
4. Re: AMSAT Member Mailing list (Hans BX2ABT)
5. AMSAT Member Mailing list (Bruce Perens)
6. Re: AMSAT Member Mailing list (Bruce Perens)
7. Re: AMSAT Member Mailing list (Bruce Perens)
8. Re: AMSAT Member Mailing list (Bruce Perens)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 01:57:45 -0400
From: Armando Mercado <am25544@?????.???>
To: amsat-bb@?????.???
Subject: [amsat-bb] Back after a 2 yr absence
Message-ID:
<CAOgooFkH6TK5L=zMEvg7qis17gh-QOz1T2UVT3361i1=SNPN_Q@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
I recently renewed my membership. Looks like I have a lot of catching up
to do.
Armando, N8IGJ
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 03:29:49 -0700
From: Michelle Thompson <mountain.michelle@?????.???>
To: Kevin <wa7fwf@?????.???>
Cc: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT Member Mailing list
Message-ID:
<CACvjz2U2fCYU4r8fLYE49HG80VHCRh9_LyW-5QQ5JP-cdNkUsA@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Yes, I can.
That part of Clayton's letter is wrong and has been repeatedly clarified
before. Including at the 2019 annual board meeting, where Tom Clark asked
me about it, as part of the record.
Clayton Coleman was secretary in 2019.
He ran the election.
He decided that candidate statements were limited in length to 350 words,
would be subject to editorial control by AMSAT, and could not include
links. These new rules were given to us right before the 4th of July
holiday with a deadline of the 7th.
This is different than any election before, where statements went directly
to the printer from the candidate, were not limited in length, and no one
from AMSAT leadership (who might be running for reelection themselves) had
any control over the content of their challengers' statements.
We got these rules right before ballots went out. We (four challengers)
already had normal-sized statements on the web and they had been up six
weeks at that point. Those were the ones we wanted to use, and link to.
We knew that as candidates, we had the right to request the mailing list,
and send our own statements, independent of the ballot.
I requested the address list and got the DBASE4 export.
Bruce Perens had already written a letter of support and distributed it
widely on the web. It introduced us and included our four full bios and
statements.
I asked Bruce if we could use his letter in the mailing. He said yes. Since
he was President of Open Research Institute at the time, he wanted the
return address to not be his private home address, but a business address.
That was ORI's address. He was the author of the endorsement, so I used his
preferred return address.
I converted the DBASE4 to a more useful format, fixed the 50 or so
undeliverable addresses, and found an inexpensive printer. Then I sent the
letter from Bruce to the printer, with the bios and statements.
That turned out to be a good thing. Bios and statements were not included
with the ballots mailed out, at all.
If we had not sent the letter, then name recognition would be the primary
factor. We were running against well-known people.
We complained about this. It was unusual departure from the past and seemed
set up to let leadership benefit from being incumbents.
The original proposal from Clayton was for an electronic only ballot.
Patrick said that the bylaws were a bit clunky here and it did need to be
mailed out on paper. Paper was required.
This is a big reason why I made a motion at our one board meeting, in
March, for a bylaws committee.
This bylaw isn't hard to fix. There's lots of examples out there of
organizations doing electronic voting with working published bylaws.
Bruce made it very clear, when the incumbents stirred up the pot about the
return address, that it was an endorsement from him, this was commonly done
in political campaigns, and it would be grossly improper for me to use
AMSATs return address because that would make it look like Bruce was
speaking for or was from AMSAT. That was not going to happen. *That* would
be improper.
No one candidate wanted their personal address used as a return address. We
were mailing this as a slate and splitting the cost. We didn't have time or
funds to make an organization or rent a box for one letter on short notice.
The printer required a real return address.
No one had the address list except the candidates. Namely me because I
contracted the printer and handled the DBASE4 address conversion. That is a
neat story in and of itself,, for another time.
Bruce only sent the text to me and chipped in some money for postage.
The printing was automated in Van Nuys, CA.
All of this is known to Clayton Coleman and his friends on the board that
signed the statement from this week. It has been explained by Bruce
publicly, and by me several times on social media. Tom Clark brought it up
at the 2019 annual board meeting because of the return address
pot-stirring. I explained it there too. Like I said, it's on the record.
I think insinuating the addresses were mishandled is a deliberate twisting
of honest efforts to scramble to get uncensored candidate statements out to
voters on short notice. We just didn't have a lot of time, and Bruce was
very generous in writing a cover letter.
Again, candidates are allowed the use of the mailing lists for election
purposes.
So, no, there was no breach. Clayton knows all this.
Saying it the way he did is a cheap shot at me, Patrick, Bruce Perens, and
ORI.
-Michelle W5NYV
On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 19:11 Kevin via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> In a previous email to the BB I posted the link to the letter we all
> received as members.
>
>
>
https://www.amsat.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/20200710_AMSAT_Lead
ership_Explains_Legal_Expenses.pdf
>
> I was re-reading it and something caught my eye that I had missed before.
>
> "AMSAT did not provide a copy of its membership mailing addresses to
> Open Research Institute."
>
> Just how was our mailing list compromised? This seems like a serious
> breech of security, was this a hack? was any other information lost?
> was it ever found out how it happened? is our mailing list as they say
> "out in the wind"?
>
> Michelle could you possibly check from the ORI side and backtrack how
> ORI came into possession of the AMSAT mailing list, was it something
> that was procured online?
>
> AMSAT needs to follow up on this privacy issue and report back what it
> found and any steps that were taken to prevent this from happening in
> the future.
>
>
> I look forward to an answer
>
> 73 Kevin WA7FWF #19623
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
> expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 06:32:38 -0500
From: David Swanson <dave@?????????????.???>
To: Michelle Thompson <mountain.michelle@?????.???>
Cc: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT Member Mailing list
Message-ID:
<CANq+eyWHQ8o369h6=fqi1PJLWuMGP-1dTVj5Oej2CstAPY8S-w@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Spin Spin Spin. The simple truth here is Director Thompson took the AMSAT
member database, and handed it over to a 3rd party competing entity for the
purpose of solicitation. I know I did not give ORI my home address, yet ORI
sent me a letter. This was a violation of my privacy, and for AMSAT
members living in the EU, this was a violation of the law. Any attempt to
explain this away is just more lies and deceit from Director Thompson about
the shady practices they have engaged in over the past few years. As I keep
saying, this isn't a one time thing, this is a pattern of
reprehensible behavior that is unbecoming of an elected position and this
community. Director Thompson and Director Stoddard should resign.
-Dave, KG5CCI
On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 5:33 AM Michelle Thompson via AMSAT-BB <
amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
> Yes, I can.
>
> That part of Clayton's letter is wrong and has been repeatedly clarified
> before. Including at the 2019 annual board meeting, where Tom Clark asked
> me about it, as part of the record.
>
> Clayton Coleman was secretary in 2019.
>
> He ran the election.
>
> He decided that candidate statements were limited in length to 350 words,
> would be subject to editorial control by AMSAT, and could not include
> links. These new rules were given to us right before the 4th of July
> holiday with a deadline of the 7th.
>
> This is different than any election before, where statements went directly
> to the printer from the candidate, were not limited in length, and no one
> from AMSAT leadership (who might be running for reelection themselves) had
> any control over the content of their challengers' statements.
>
> We got these rules right before ballots went out. We (four challengers)
> already had normal-sized statements on the web and they had been up six
> weeks at that point. Those were the ones we wanted to use, and link to.
>
> We knew that as candidates, we had the right to request the mailing list,
> and send our own statements, independent of the ballot.
>
> I requested the address list and got the DBASE4 export.
>
> Bruce Perens had already written a letter of support and distributed it
> widely on the web. It introduced us and included our four full bios and
> statements.
>
> I asked Bruce if we could use his letter in the mailing. He said yes. Since
> he was President of Open Research Institute at the time, he wanted the
> return address to not be his private home address, but a business address.
> That was ORI's address. He was the author of the endorsement, so I used his
> preferred return address.
>
> I converted the DBASE4 to a more useful format, fixed the 50 or so
> undeliverable addresses, and found an inexpensive printer. Then I sent the
> letter from Bruce to the printer, with the bios and statements.
>
> That turned out to be a good thing. Bios and statements were not included
> with the ballots mailed out, at all.
>
> If we had not sent the letter, then name recognition would be the primary
> factor. We were running against well-known people.
>
> We complained about this. It was unusual departure from the past and seemed
> set up to let leadership benefit from being incumbents.
>
> The original proposal from Clayton was for an electronic only ballot.
> Patrick said that the bylaws were a bit clunky here and it did need to be
> mailed out on paper. Paper was required.
>
> This is a big reason why I made a motion at our one board meeting, in
> March, for a bylaws committee.
>
> This bylaw isn't hard to fix. There's lots of examples out there of
> organizations doing electronic voting with working published bylaws.
>
> Bruce made it very clear, when the incumbents stirred up the pot about the
> return address, that it was an endorsement from him, this was commonly done
> in political campaigns, and it would be grossly improper for me to use
> AMSATs return address because that would make it look like Bruce was
> speaking for or was from AMSAT. That was not going to happen. *That* would
> be improper.
>
> No one candidate wanted their personal address used as a return address. We
> were mailing this as a slate and splitting the cost. We didn't have time or
> funds to make an organization or rent a box for one letter on short notice.
> The printer required a real return address.
>
> No one had the address list except the candidates. Namely me because I
> contracted the printer and handled the DBASE4 address conversion. That is a
> neat story in and of itself,, for another time.
>
> Bruce only sent the text to me and chipped in some money for postage.
>
> The printing was automated in Van Nuys, CA.
>
> All of this is known to Clayton Coleman and his friends on the board that
> signed the statement from this week. It has been explained by Bruce
> publicly, and by me several times on social media. Tom Clark brought it up
> at the 2019 annual board meeting because of the return address
> pot-stirring. I explained it there too. Like I said, it's on the record.
>
> I think insinuating the addresses were mishandled is a deliberate twisting
> of honest efforts to scramble to get uncensored candidate statements out to
> voters on short notice. We just didn't have a lot of time, and Bruce was
> very generous in writing a cover letter.
>
> Again, candidates are allowed the use of the mailing lists for election
> purposes.
>
> So, no, there was no breach. Clayton knows all this.
>
> Saying it the way he did is a cheap shot at me, Patrick, Bruce Perens, and
> ORI.
>
> -Michelle W5NYV
>
> On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 19:11 Kevin via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
>
> > Hello All,
> >
> > In a previous email to the BB I posted the link to the letter we all
> > received as members.
> >
> >
> >
>
https://www.amsat.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/20200710_AMSAT_Lead
ership_Explains_Legal_Expenses.pdf
> >
> > I was re-reading it and something caught my eye that I had missed before.
> >
> > "AMSAT did not provide a copy of its membership mailing addresses to
> > Open Research Institute."
> >
> > Just how was our mailing list compromised? This seems like a serious
> > breech of security, was this a hack? was any other information lost?
> > was it ever found out how it happened? is our mailing list as they say
> > "out in the wind"?
> >
> > Michelle could you possibly check from the ORI side and backtrack how
> > ORI came into possession of the AMSAT mailing list, was it something
> > that was procured online?
> >
> > AMSAT needs to follow up on this privacy issue and report back what it
> > found and any steps that were taken to prevent this from happening in
> > the future.
> >
> >
> > I look forward to an answer
> >
> > 73 Kevin WA7FWF #19623
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
> Opinions
> > expressed
> > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> > AMSAT-NA.
> > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
> program!
> > Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
> expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 20:02:25 +0800
From: Hans BX2ABT <hans.bx2abt@???.?????.???>
To: amsat-bb@?????.???
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT Member Mailing list
Message-ID: <4c8da5db-cddd-e51e-0b26-9142c1787528@???.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
On 7/13/20 7:32 PM, David Swanson via AMSAT-BB wrote:
> Spin Spin Spin.
I think this is the biggest problem in the world right now.
People simply don't want to believe each other any more, or even
entertain the thought that the "opponent" might be (partially) right or
acting in good faith. Mistakes cannot be forgiven, because they are
always made with malicious intent. And one's own actions are always
right, because the other party is always wrong.
The trenches are dug, the weapons are loaded: let's go to war.
In the meantime the Russians give us Sputnik RS-44 (almost MEO), the
Chinese shoot cool experiments into space (albeit with the quality of
most stuff made in China) and the Germans achieve the first
geo-stationary amateur payload. What does AMSAT-NA achieve? The world is
already shaking its head when the USA are mentioned because of how it
handles COVID-19. Now the amateur radio world laughs at how AMSAT-NA is
handling itself. To quote your great leader: "So sad!"
73 de Hans (BX2ABT)
P.S. not an AMSAT-NA member, just here to share and learn about
satellites. Now ducking for incoming flak.
> The simple truth here is Director Thompson took the AMSAT
> member database, and handed it over to a 3rd party competing entity for the
> purpose of solicitation. I know I did not give ORI my home address, yet ORI
> sent me a letter. This was a violation of my privacy, and for AMSAT
> members living in the EU, this was a violation of the law. Any attempt to
> explain this away is just more lies and deceit from Director Thompson about
> the shady practices they have engaged in over the past few years. As I keep
> saying, this isn't a one time thing, this is a pattern of
> reprehensible behavior that is unbecoming of an elected position and this
> community. Director Thompson and Director Stoddard should resign.
>
> -Dave, KG5CCI
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 5:33 AM Michelle Thompson via AMSAT-BB <
> amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
>
>> Yes, I can.
>>
>> That part of Clayton's letter is wrong and has been repeatedly clarified
>> before. Including at the 2019 annual board meeting, where Tom Clark asked
>> me about it, as part of the record.
>>
>> Clayton Coleman was secretary in 2019.
>>
>> He ran the election.
>>
>> He decided that candidate statements were limited in length to 350 words,
>> would be subject to editorial control by AMSAT, and could not include
>> links. These new rules were given to us right before the 4th of July
>> holiday with a deadline of the 7th.
>>
>> This is different than any election before, where statements went directly
>> to the printer from the candidate, were not limited in length, and no one
>> from AMSAT leadership (who might be running for reelection themselves) had
>> any control over the content of their challengers' statements.
>>
>> We got these rules right before ballots went out. We (four challengers)
>> already had normal-sized statements on the web and they had been up six
>> weeks at that point. Those were the ones we wanted to use, and link to.
>>
>> We knew that as candidates, we had the right to request the mailing list,
>> and send our own statements, independent of the ballot.
>>
>> I requested the address list and got the DBASE4 export.
>>
>> Bruce Perens had already written a letter of support and distributed it
>> widely on the web. It introduced us and included our four full bios and
>> statements.
>>
>> I asked Bruce if we could use his letter in the mailing. He said yes. Since
>> he was President of Open Research Institute at the time, he wanted the
>> return address to not be his private home address, but a business address.
>> That was ORI's address. He was the author of the endorsement, so I used his
>> preferred return address.
>>
>> I converted the DBASE4 to a more useful format, fixed the 50 or so
>> undeliverable addresses, and found an inexpensive printer. Then I sent the
>> letter from Bruce to the printer, with the bios and statements.
>>
>> That turned out to be a good thing. Bios and statements were not included
>> with the ballots mailed out, at all.
>>
>> If we had not sent the letter, then name recognition would be the primary
>> factor. We were running against well-known people.
>>
>> We complained about this. It was unusual departure from the past and seemed
>> set up to let leadership benefit from being incumbents.
>>
>> The original proposal from Clayton was for an electronic only ballot.
>> Patrick said that the bylaws were a bit clunky here and it did need to be
>> mailed out on paper. Paper was required.
>>
>> This is a big reason why I made a motion at our one board meeting, in
>> March, for a bylaws committee.
>>
>> This bylaw isn't hard to fix. There's lots of examples out there of
>> organizations doing electronic voting with working published bylaws.
>>
>> Bruce made it very clear, when the incumbents stirred up the pot about the
>> return address, that it was an endorsement from him, this was commonly done
>> in political campaigns, and it would be grossly improper for me to use
>> AMSATs return address because that would make it look like Bruce was
>> speaking for or was from AMSAT. That was not going to happen. *That* would
>> be improper.
>>
>> No one candidate wanted their personal address used as a return address. We
>> were mailing this as a slate and splitting the cost. We didn't have time or
>> funds to make an organization or rent a box for one letter on short notice.
>> The printer required a real return address.
>>
>> No one had the address list except the candidates. Namely me because I
>> contracted the printer and handled the DBASE4 address conversion. That is a
>> neat story in and of itself,, for another time.
>>
>> Bruce only sent the text to me and chipped in some money for postage.
>>
>> The printing was automated in Van Nuys, CA.
>>
>> All of this is known to Clayton Coleman and his friends on the board that
>> signed the statement from this week. It has been explained by Bruce
>> publicly, and by me several times on social media. Tom Clark brought it up
>> at the 2019 annual board meeting because of the return address
>> pot-stirring. I explained it there too. Like I said, it's on the record.
>>
>> I think insinuating the addresses were mishandled is a deliberate twisting
>> of honest efforts to scramble to get uncensored candidate statements out to
>> voters on short notice. We just didn't have a lot of time, and Bruce was
>> very generous in writing a cover letter.
>>
>> Again, candidates are allowed the use of the mailing lists for election
>> purposes.
>>
>> So, no, there was no breach. Clayton knows all this.
>>
>> Saying it the way he did is a cheap shot at me, Patrick, Bruce Perens, and
>> ORI.
>>
>> -Michelle W5NYV
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 19:11 Kevin via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello All,
>>>
>>> In a previous email to the BB I posted the link to the letter we all
>>> received as members.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
https://www.amsat.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/20200710_AMSAT_Lead
ership_Explains_Legal_Expenses.pdf
>>> I was re-reading it and something caught my eye that I had missed before.
>>>
>>> "AMSAT did not provide a copy of its membership mailing addresses to
>>> Open Research Institute."
>>>
>>> Just how was our mailing list compromised? This seems like a serious
>>> breech of security, was this a hack? was any other information lost?
>>> was it ever found out how it happened? is our mailing list as they say
>>> "out in the wind"?
>>>
>>> Michelle could you possibly check from the ORI side and backtrack how
>>> ORI came into possession of the AMSAT mailing list, was it something
>>> that was procured online?
>>>
>>> AMSAT needs to follow up on this privacy issue and report back what it
>>> found and any steps that were taken to prevent this from happening in
>>> the future.
>>>
>>>
>>> I look forward to an answer
>>>
>>> 73 Kevin WA7FWF #19623
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
>> Opinions
>>> expressed
>>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
>>> AMSAT-NA.
>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>> program!
>>> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
>> expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
>> AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 20:33:38 -0700
From: Bruce Perens <bruce@??????.???>
To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: [amsat-bb] AMSAT Member Mailing list
Message-ID:
<CAK2MWOs9Vjn46XSXiOt-a_453vZnObB5GsPF+RhZV7EuryDyLg@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Bruce Perens <bruce@??????.???>
Date: Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 8:32 PM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT Member Mailing list
To: Kevin <wa7fwf@?????.???>
The mailing list was never compromised. But my HOME address, under "Open
Research Institute" was used as the return address. This was a mistake and
I didn't ask for it. I was, however, the author of the mailer, in which I
introduced the candidates. The mailing was done by a bulk Mail company and
did not involve me. I got one returned letter, informed someone responsible
who had a right to see that address, and promptly forgot it.
Thanks
Bruce
On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 7:11 PM Kevin via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> In a previous email to the BB I posted the link to the letter we all
> received as members.
>
>
>
https://www.amsat.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/20200710_AMSAT_Lead
ership_Explains_Legal_Expenses.pdf
>
> I was re-reading it and something caught my eye that I had missed before.
>
> "AMSAT did not provide a copy of its membership mailing addresses to
> Open Research Institute."
>
> Just how was our mailing list compromised? This seems like a serious
> breech of security, was this a hack? was any other information lost?
> was it ever found out how it happened? is our mailing list as they say
> "out in the wind"?
>
> Michelle could you possibly check from the ORI side and backtrack how
> ORI came into possession of the AMSAT mailing list, was it something
> that was procured online?
>
> AMSAT needs to follow up on this privacy issue and report back what it
> found and any steps that were taken to prevent this from happening in
> the future.
>
>
> I look forward to an answer
>
> 73 Kevin WA7FWF #19623
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
> expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 21:08:35 -0700
From: Bruce Perens <bruce@??????.???>
To: Kevin <wa7fwf@?????.???>, AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT Member Mailing list
Message-ID:
<CAK2MWOskn_hhT4MpdhwQ2-nz7P44u+SUVuYvr-PYd7P8k3-ARw@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
The candidates are allowed the use of the mailing list for their campaign.
If you read the bylaws, they make it very clear. One of the candidates did
all of the handling of the mailing list.
Incidentally, the board was not aware that they had to give the mailing
list to the candidates. This was something the candidates had to tell them,
after I read the bylaws. Had the board run things the way they desired,
only a board controlled 200 word statement would have reached you from the
candidates, except for the incumbents, who have had free use of AMSAT's
official publications to carry their opinions.
In a more perfect world, the board would have known their own bylaws, or at
least the secretary who was running the election would have read them.
But in a more perfect world, two people were trying to reform the
organization with not face quite this uphill a battle.
Thanks
Bruce
On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 9:00 PM Kevin <wa7fwf@?????.???> wrote:
> Well how did the bulk mailing company get the AMSAT member mailing list if
> AMSAT did not provide it?
>
> Kevin
>
>
> On 7/12/2020 8:32 PM, Bruce Perens wrote:
>
> The mailing list was never compromised. But my HOME address, under "Open
> Research Institute" was used as the return address. This was a mistake and
> I didn't ask for it. I was, however, the author of the mailer, in which I
> introduced the candidates. The mailing was done by a bulk Mail company and
> did not involve me. I got one returned letter, informed someone responsible
> who had a right to see that address, and promptly forgot it.
>
> Thanks
>
> Bruce
>
> On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 7:11 PM Kevin via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello All,
>>
>> In a previous email to the BB I posted the link to the letter we all
>> received as members.
>>
>>
>>
https://www.amsat.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/20200710_AMSAT_Lead
ership_Explains_Legal_Expenses.pdf
>>
>> I was re-reading it and something caught my eye that I had missed before.
>>
>> "AMSAT did not provide a copy of its membership mailing addresses to
>> Open Research Institute."
>>
>> Just how was our mailing list compromised? This seems like a serious
>> breech of security, was this a hack? was any other information lost?
>> was it ever found out how it happened? is our mailing list as they say
>> "out in the wind"?
>>
>> Michelle could you possibly check from the ORI side and backtrack how
>> ORI came into possession of the AMSAT mailing list, was it something
>> that was procured online?
>>
>> AMSAT needs to follow up on this privacy issue and report back what it
>> found and any steps that were taken to prevent this from happening in
>> the future.
>>
>>
>> I look forward to an answer
>>
>> 73 Kevin WA7FWF #19623
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
>> Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
>> AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 21:48:21 -0700
From: Bruce Perens <bruce@??????.???>
To: Kevin <wa7fwf@?????.???>
Cc: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT Member Mailing list
Message-ID:
<CAK2MWOu-sb=r3bn14TwkT37m_LVhhj+rGrMHM90O0O_nQkjYuw@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Kevin,
No, I never saw the mailing list . I didn't do the mailing . I only wrote
the content .
So, why was I involved at all ?
I won't say I'm the best tech evangelist you know, because that is for
other people to judge. However, if you count the Open Source movement in
software; the campaign for the elimination of the Morse code requirement
for Amateur Radio licenses, which among other things I got on the front
page of the New York Times, above the fold; My work to help elect a new
ARRL board to end the confidentiality versus transparency debacle; And my
global appearance for IBM's "Dear Tech", campaign, which got at least 50000
television and Internet airplays;
If you count all those things, I am probably the person you want
introducing you as a candidate, and I might be a good person to tell you
how to run a campaign.
As it happens I wrote my own campaign, which I was going to put out under
my own name, endorsing those candidates. And then the candidates chose to
use it as their main campaign statement. This was very flattering and
entirely their own choice.
As an ARRL member, it was my right to participate in their election, and it
is my right to participate in AMSAT's.
Thanks
Bruce K6BP
On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 9:29 PM Kevin <wa7fwf@?????.???> wrote:
> Bruce,
> So hang on a moment, you're telling me that the candidates are allowed
> to use the mailing list for their campaign (fine), but rather than them
> doing it themselves they turned the task over to you? So you were in
> possession of the mailing list and then you turned it over to the bulk
> mailing center when you authored the mailer?
>
> Kevin WA7FWF #19623
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 7/12/2020 9:08 PM, Bruce Perens wrote:
>
> The candidates are allowed the use of the mailing list for their campaign.
> If you read the bylaws, they make it very clear. One of the candidates did
> all of the handling of the mailing list.
>
> Incidentally, the board was not aware that they had to give the mailing
> list to the candidates. This was something the candidates had to tell them,
> after I read the bylaws. Had the board run things the way they desired,
> only a board controlled 200 word statement would have reached you from the
> candidates, except for the incumbents, who have had free use of AMSAT's
> official publications to carry their opinions.
>
> In a more perfect world, the board would have known their own bylaws, or
> at least the secretary who was running the election would have read them.
>
> But in a more perfect world, two people were trying to reform the
> organization with not face quite this uphill a battle.
>
> Thanks
>
> Bruce
>
> On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 9:00 PM Kevin <wa7fwf@?????.???> wrote:
>
>> Well how did the bulk mailing company get the AMSAT member mailing list
>> if AMSAT did not provide it?
>>
>> Kevin
>>
>>
>> On 7/12/2020 8:32 PM, Bruce Perens wrote:
>>
>> The mailing list was never compromised. But my HOME address, under "Open
>> Research Institute" was used as the return address. This was a mistake and
>> I didn't ask for it. I was, however, the author of the mailer, in which I
>> introduced the candidates. The mailing was done by a bulk Mail company and
>> did not involve me. I got one returned letter, informed someone responsible
>> who had a right to see that address, and promptly forgot it.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Bruce
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 7:11 PM Kevin via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello All,
>>>
>>> In a previous email to the BB I posted the link to the letter we all
>>> received as members.
>>>
>>>
>>>
https://www.amsat.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/20200710_AMSAT_Lead
ership_Explains_Legal_Expenses.pdf
>>>
>>> I was re-reading it and something caught my eye that I had missed before.
>>>
>>> "AMSAT did not provide a copy of its membership mailing addresses to
>>> Open Research Institute."
>>>
>>> Just how was our mailing list compromised? This seems like a serious
>>> breech of security, was this a hack? was any other information lost?
>>> was it ever found out how it happened? is our mailing list as they say
>>> "out in the wind"?
>>>
>>> Michelle could you possibly check from the ORI side and backtrack how
>>> ORI came into possession of the AMSAT mailing list, was it something
>>> that was procured online?
>>>
>>> AMSAT needs to follow up on this privacy issue and report back what it
>>> found and any steps that were taken to prevent this from happening in
>>> the future.
>>>
>>>
>>> I look forward to an answer
>>>
>>> 73 Kevin WA7FWF #19623
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
>>> Opinions expressed
>>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
>>> AMSAT-NA.
>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>>> program!
>>> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>>
>>
>>
>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 22:30:29 -0700
From: Bruce Perens <bruce@??????.???>
To: Kevin <wa7fwf@?????.???>
Cc: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT Member Mailing list
Message-ID:
<CAK2MWOsYiCqnWi8igTOnVC-vh_Xo=yFtZKYgwwgnzYF-6qNfPQ@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
The candidate felt that since I wrote the letter, that the return address
should be mine. I didn't ask for it, I especially did not ask for my home
address, which is not in the call book, to be used. As it happens, I found
out about one silent key member in the return mail, which I passed on and
promptly forgot. I work for lawyers all day in my consulting business, and
thus I read the rules, I understand the rules, I follow the rules. These
are not, by the way, Robert's Rules of Order. These are things like what a
director is responsible for, and how to run an election. It really bothers
me that the incumbents didn't know those rules.
Thanks
Bruce
On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 10:11 PM Kevin <wa7fwf@?????.???> wrote:
> Well Bruce,
>
> Something doesn't jive here, " I didn't do the mailing . I only wrote
> the content " then it seems the candidate would have been the person that
> was dealing with the bulk mailer and would have had their return address
> listed and it would not have been your home address on it.
>
> Guess it's time to pick a different bulk mailer.
>
>
> Kevin WA7FWF #19623
>
>
>
>
> On 7/12/2020 9:48 PM, Bruce Perens wrote:
>
> Kevin,
>
> No, I never saw the mailing list . I didn't do the mailing . I only wrote
> the content .
>
> So, why was I involved at all ?
>
> I won't say I'm the best tech evangelist you know, because that is for
> other people to judge. However, if you count the Open Source movement in
> software; the campaign for the elimination of the Morse code requirement
> for Amateur Radio licenses, which among other things I got on the front
> page of the New York Times, above the fold; My work to help elect a new
> ARRL board to end the confidentiality versus transparency debacle; And my
> global appearance for IBM's "Dear Tech", campaign, which got at least 50000
> television and Internet airplays;
>
> If you count all those things, I am probably the person you want
> introducing you as a candidate, and I might be a good person to tell you
> how to run a campaign.
>
> As it happens I wrote my own campaign, which I was going to put out under
> my own name, endorsing those candidates. And then the candidates chose to
> use it as their main campaign statement. This was very flattering and
> entirely their own choice.
>
> As an ARRL member, it was my right to participate in their election, and
> it is my right to participate in AMSAT's.
>
> Thanks
>
> Bruce K6BP
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 9:29 PM Kevin <wa7fwf@?????.???> wrote:
>
>> Bruce,
>> So hang on a moment, you're telling me that the candidates are allowed
>> to use the mailing list for their campaign (fine), but rather than them
>> doing it themselves they turned the task over to you? So you were in
>> possession of the mailing list and then you turned it over to the bulk
>> mailing center when you authored the mailer?
>>
>> Kevin WA7FWF #19623
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7/12/2020 9:08 PM, Bruce Perens wrote:
>>
>> The candidates are allowed the use of the mailing list for their
>> campaign. If you read the bylaws, they make it very clear. One of the
>> candidates did all of the handling of the mailing list.
>>
>> Incidentally, the board was not aware that they had to give the mailing
>> list to the candidates. This was something the candidates had to tell them,
>> after I read the bylaws. Had the board run things the way they desired,
>> only a board controlled 200 word statement would have reached you from the
>> candidates, except for the incumbents, who have had free use of AMSAT's
>> official publications to carry their opinions.
>>
>> In a more perfect world, the board would have known their own bylaws, or
>> at least the secretary who was running the election would have read them.
>>
>> But in a more perfect world, two people were trying to reform the
>> organization with not face quite this uphill a battle.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Bruce
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 9:00 PM Kevin <wa7fwf@?????.???> wrote:
>>
>>> Well how did the bulk mailing company get the AMSAT member mailing list
>>> if AMSAT did not provide it?
>>>
>>> Kevin
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7/12/2020 8:32 PM, Bruce Perens wrote:
>>>
>>> The mailing list was never compromised. But my HOME address, under "Open
>>> Research Institute" was used as the return address. This was a mistake and
>>> I didn't ask for it. I was, however, the author of the mailer, in which I
>>> introduced the candidates. The mailing was done by a bulk Mail company and
>>> did not involve me. I got one returned letter, informed someone
responsible
>>> who had a right to see that address, and promptly forgot it.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Bruce
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 7:11 PM Kevin via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello All,
>>>>
>>>> In a previous email to the BB I posted the link to the letter we all
>>>> received as members.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
https://www.amsat.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/20200710_AMSAT_Lead
ership_Explains_Legal_Expenses.pdf
>>>>
>>>> I was re-reading it and something caught my eye that I had missed
>>>> before.
>>>>
>>>> "AMSAT did not provide a copy of its membership mailing addresses to
>>>> Open Research Institute."
>>>>
>>>> Just how was our mailing list compromised? This seems like a
>>>> serious
>>>> breech of security, was this a hack? was any other information lost?
>>>> was it ever found out how it happened? is our mailing list as they say
>>>> "out in the wind"?
>>>>
>>>> Michelle could you possibly check from the ORI side and backtrack how
>>>> ORI came into possession of the AMSAT mailing list, was it something
>>>> that was procured online?
>>>>
>>>> AMSAT needs to follow up on this privacy issue and report back what it
>>>> found and any steps that were taken to prevent this from happening in
>>>> the future.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I look forward to an answer
>>>>
>>>> 73 Kevin WA7FWF #19623
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>>>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
>>>> Opinions expressed
>>>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views
>>>> of AMSAT-NA.
>>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>>>> program!
>>>> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Sent via amsat-bb@?????.???.
AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide
without requiring membership. Opinions expressed
are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 15, Issue 241
*****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
