{"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opengovdata/opengovdata.github.io/comments/9457448","html_url":"https://github.com/opengovdata/opengovdata.github.io/commit/f0f1940b5f4cf4486e76fb366f491247f44f6ed4#commitcomment-9457448","id":9457448,"user":{"login":"vzvenyach","id":4153048,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/4153048?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/vzvenyach","html_url":"https://github.com/vzvenyach","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vzvenyach/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vzvenyach/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vzvenyach/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vzvenyach/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vzvenyach/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vzvenyach/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vzvenyach/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vzvenyach/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vzvenyach/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"position":null,"line":null,"path":"","commit_id":"f0f1940b5f4cf4486e76fb366f491247f44f6ed4","created_at":"2015-01-27T11:38:14Z","updated_at":"2015-01-27T11:38:14Z","body":"Great post! A couple of reactions: \r\n\r\n1. In your opening paragraphs you hit on a key point: ensuring healthy open-government cannot be exclusively a governmental function; it requires civic engagement. In the case of open-government data, ensuring healthy practices requires a \"technologically-democratized society\". :+1: \r\n\r\n2. I am intrigued by your critique of separating data/interaction and the analogy to First Amendment jurisprudence. Under the traditional First Amendment jurisprudence, it is practically an article of faith that the solution to harmful speech is \"more speech.\" So, one could argue, so what if Westboro Baptist Church uses government data to advance the political agenda? Others can compete with that speech using the same or other data sets. But your argument goes a little deeper, and is reminiscent of [the debate on hate speech](http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/12/going-in-circles-with-hate-speech/). More pointedly, at what point is the government responsible for promoting or discouraging harmful speech? \r\n\r\nTo that end, your suggestion about redaction (and we'll discuss alternative screening mechanisms in the Privacy session) seems to be that it can actually be a democracy-enhancing mechanism. Do I have your argument right?  \r\n\r\nAlso, because @gcooper08 and @ais2 commented [here](1647ea760ec0839971e4c329083108d16bd52893), I'm going to suggest that we continue the conversation on this post. Also, @ais2, what took two years to redact?"}}