Publishing redacted minutes?

[Lucan Unlordly]

The national governing body for a particular sport publishes it's minutes online with paragraphs redacted by covering with a black panel.
It transpires that the redaction method doesn't work - copying and pasting the minutes into a blank document, emails etc., reveals the content. This raises a couple of questions?

1. Because the redaction method doesn't work, and no devious attempt has been made to circumnavigate the system, can the full content be published in full on social media? Much of the information could, or should be shared with members. They are being kept in the dark.

2. In one instance an individual who'd been through the disciplinary process, and cleared, was named but this and the outcome was redacted, apparently to protect the board from looking foolhardy.

Any views on the legality of sharing the artcles in full?

 

[NickGrogan]

Is someone shared it anonymously, then surely you have a duty to bring this to attention of members?

 

[WaveJumper]

Classic case of people not being PC illiterate

Surely if the person publishing said document had reason to "delete or hide" said information would this not have been agreed by those at the meeting .... for whatever reason ? Rather foolish of them to send out in a format that is not secure, I certainly would bring it to their attention but personally I would not pass it on

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

Is someone shared it anonymously, then surely you have a duty to bring this to attention of members?

The minutes are published online and can be seen by the general public. I have no affiliation to the governing body and was made aware of the systems weakness by somebody who is not shy when it comes to exposing their poor practices. The majority of the redacted content falls into the 'why wouldn't they want members to know that, what are they trying to hide'? Some parts relate to commercial contracts which is understandable. It's the 'why wouldn't they want their members to know that', which begs to be exposed. One story that deserves an airing is about a meeting between top executives to change legality and governance of the sport. Many know and disagree with the intention but don't know how advanced discussions are.

It transpires that other publicly viewable documents name the victim of a sexual assault and those giving eye witness and character accounts for both parties.

 

[NickGrogan]

Some should clearly be dedacted properly, other's seem to be a bit more what are they hiding.

Plenty of sites where someone could post the relevant bits without exposing everything.

Of course it does mean they'll probably do a better job of redacting next time, which you can consider a good or bad thing.

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

Classic case of people not being PC illiterate

Surely if the person publishing said document had reason to "delete or hide" said information would this not have been agreed by those at the meeting .... for whatever reason ? Rather foolish of them to send out in a format that is not secure, I certainly would bring it to their attention but personally I would not pass it on

I doubt very much if any mutual agreement was reached or needed. It's become normal practice.

See previous post. I won't be telling them or publishing the full minutes. They are likely at some stage to be talking about me/my company. I've a bag of Popcorn ready