Live data from Hacker News

Chatham House Rule is suddenly everywhere in the Bay Area

sfstandard.com

1–10 of 264 posts

Re: Chatham House Rule is suddenly everywhere in the Bay Area

#4

So people feel free to speak candidly?

This isn't about people speaking candidly. It's about not hurting the feelings of people who do and work on bad things and allowing them to still get invited to events without fearing any consequences for their actions.

It's the same reason Kissinger still got invites to Manhattan social events (and, bizarrely, Clinton campaign events) long after it was known that he was a traitor and a war criminal.

Re: Chatham House Rule is suddenly everywhere in the Bay Area

#6
People are not bound to follow this rule, correct? As in, there's no legal consequence?

> Instead, his groups have moved to signing NDAs or explicitly stating that conversations are not to be shared externally.

This seems a bit better, albeit with more work.

Re: Chatham House Rule is suddenly everywhere in the Bay Area

#7
Seems pretty obvious why in a world where if you misspeak or say something ill considered it can be all over twitter and have serious personal and professional ramifications.

Regardless of how well meaning people are in their desire to hold people to account for bad views, it does have a chilling effect, and you can't learn if you don't have a safe place to make mistakes.

Re: Chatham House Rule is suddenly everywhere in the Bay Area

#8

People are not bound to follow this rule, correct? As in, there's no legal consequence? > Instead, his groups have moved to signing NDAs or explicitly stating that conversations are not to be shared externally. This seems a bit better, albeit with more work.

Not everything has to be legal. The consequence is you don't get invited back and some people might think less of you.

Legally enforcing every social norm is dystopian.

Re: Chatham House Rule is suddenly everywhere in the Bay Area

#10

[flagged]

[flagged]

Regardless of the rightness or wrongness of the grandparent's views, i think this comment demonstrates why the gp might feel cautious about giving their honest views on the subject.
Post reply on HN