[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

properly timing FOIPA for best results [was: 1977 Justice Dept. Report on CIA (was: Rockefeller Commission Report)]

To: coderman <[email protected]>
Subject: properly timing FOIPA for best results [was: 1977 Justice Dept. Report on CIA (was: Rockefeller Commission Report)]
From: [email protected] (Lodewijk andré de la porte)
Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 04:57:24 +0200
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, effaustin-discuss <[email protected]>
In-reply-to: <CAJVRA1TCvE--gjnDBxP+aT9thAVV0biU_K-mmatrnTedWxQSew@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJVRA1TCvE--gjnDBxP+aT9thAVV0biU_K-mmatrnTedWxQSew@mail.gmail.com>

2014-10-05 4:36 GMT+02:00 coderman <[email protected]>:

> does anyone have guidance on this timing?  perhaps 6-8 years after
> initially coming under scrutiny?


I have no specific knowledge/experience, but I'd say that you could use
"FOIA attempt" data to construct a pretty good "FOIA completion rate" over
time picture. Maybe repeating some older FOIAs can lead to interesting
completion results."Delays" would also be very variable, depending on
police investigations. But probably normally distributed.

Ultimately Data wins! And probably nothing else :(
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20141005/70b1735b/attachment.html>

References:
- properly timing FOIPA for best results [was: 1977 Justice Dept. Report on CIA (was: Rockefeller Commission Report)]
  - From: [email protected] (coderman)

Prev by Date: properly timing FOIPA for best results [was: 1977 Justice Dept. Report on CIA (was: Rockefeller Commission Report)]
Next by Date: Mu [was: How worse is the Shellshock bash bug than Heartbleed?]
Previous by thread: properly timing FOIPA for best results [was: 1977 Justice Dept. Report on CIA (was: Rockefeller Commission Report)]
Next by thread: Radical-safest TLDs in 2014
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread