Quote:
Originally Posted by R Jones
I don't want to get into any spats, but I'm really uncomfortable with the personal criticism of Simon Davies that is going on here. I don't think the world will come to an end if we just wait to see what happens with the PIA.
We can disagree with actions that 80/20 may have taken, but I do get uneasy when that turns into personal remarks and they certainly don't take our campaign forward. The guilty parties here are the ISP's and Phorm.
Just my penn'orth.
|
My own "personal" remarks about Simon should be taken as cruel satire rather than hateful personal attacks on his person. I know of Simon's previous work as a privacy advocate and he has done some fantastic work, however many people see his engagement with Phorm as a betrayal (I personally do not, and I see it as an opportunity to play devils advocate and point out the perceived privacy dilemma seen by others).
I know that Simon has mentioned the "opt-in" position several times but another observer over on BadPhorm pointed out after a Channel 4 News interview (London event) that "Simon had certainly _earned_ his Phorm paycheck" the way he came across. (note in that interview Simon mentioned "opt-in" again).
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/science_technology/data+pimping+or+just+bad+phorm/2028147
(Simon's opinion is around the 2m20s mark)
I think it is valid to keep mentioning Simon's role in the ongoing Phorm debate and how it appears (personal attacks valid upto a point). Another poster remarked that Phorm have tied Simon up with this PIA work in order that he cannot spend an equal amount of time as a critic wearing one of his many hats as 'Privacy International' director. Simon 'Two hats' Davies has damaged himself by taking on the role as Phorm's sycophant privacy advocate Vs his role as the peoples champion battling privacy scums such as Phorm.