&gt; I would be unhappy if people said &quot;I think that karmacondon has made mistakes in the past, so he shouldn&#x27;t be trusted to do his job ever again.&quot;<p>It&#x27;s not about mistakes. Mistakes are - usually - a sign that someone needed to learn. They do not as a rule include wanton intent.<p>And if a person were to make too many mistakes then they probably should not be trusted.<p>&gt; I understand what you&#x27;re saying, and I think I get where you&#x27;re coming from. But like the GGP post, you&#x27;re begging the question and assuming that your beliefs are so correct that anyone who disagrees with them must be insincere.<p>No, that&#x27;s the opposite. You have beliefs that you state are so correct that they stand on their own, in spite of a bunch of historical evidence to the contrary, starting roughly at the time that we invented writing going all the way into the present. That&#x27;s a pretty gullible position.<p>&gt; I don&#x27;t think there&#x27;s anything inherently wrong with the government monitoring potentially criminal groups or building databases. That&#x27;s what we pay them to do. If they get out of hand then we, the people, will deal with it.<p>Potentially criminal groupls: everybody.<p>You&#x27;re apparently one of the people where the &#x27;fear&#x27; button has been pressed, don&#x27;t let your fear get the better of you.<p>Btw, I note that you write all these &#x27;reasonable disagreement&#x27; things from the position of an anonymous coward which makes me think that maybe you do realize the value of your privacy after all.