Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz
I think the question is a bit more nuanced than that. They aren't suggesting keeping signatures. As brought up earlier, they'd just keep addresses of houses that signed, so they know who is a likely supporter later. Is a house address private information? It's hard to argue it's not "information" so even that might be in breach. But what if you just remember a bunch of houses in your neighbourhood? Is remembering that when you go campaigning later a breach?
|
It's not even that. In the interview Yeremiy was talking about the connections being created throughout the community. Volunteers, organizers, and signees all are given opportunities to build relationships beyond just the transaction of signing a name to paper.
If you have a conversation at someone's door and they show they are really interested in doing more than just putting pen to paper then that turns into an opportunity for more activism.
She describes it as a death star that the UCP is building against themselves by motivating people to build an Anti-UCP movement and suggesting that it may grow into something more in the future.