Talk:Scenario 01: Election interference: Difference between revisions
Reviewer331 (talk | contribs) |
Reviewer331 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
(3) Important to explain the distinction between fake news and real news for the purposes of the scenarios. Not a legal issue, but important for clarity. The one offered may not be perfect. |
(3) Important to explain the distinction between fake news and real news for the purposes of the scenarios. Not a legal issue, but important for clarity. The one offered may not be perfect. |
||
(4)The changes to the line: "A large batch of private emails purportedly exchanged only among members of a candidate’s campaign team is leaked onto a well-known, publicly-accessible internet site" clarifies for readers what is later picked up on in the analysis, ie these are in-house, closed-circuit, private emails that have been outed. The word trove, I think, should be switched by batch. |
|||
(4) |
|||
Revision as of 03:54, 5 November 2018
This is a sample comment. Kubomacak (talk) 14:02, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
Collection of comments to text edits
(1) Two keywords added and will be worked into the analysis: cyber reconnaissance (as defined in T2) and critical infrastructure (as defined in T2 and referred to in the 2015 GGE)
(2) cyber-enabled incidents or incidents in cyberspace
(3) Important to explain the distinction between fake news and real news for the purposes of the scenarios. Not a legal issue, but important for clarity. The one offered may not be perfect.
(4)The changes to the line: "A large batch of private emails purportedly exchanged only among members of a candidate’s campaign team is leaked onto a well-known, publicly-accessible internet site" clarifies for readers what is later picked up on in the analysis, ie these are in-house, closed-circuit, private emails that have been outed. The word trove, I think, should be switched by batch.