UK Home Secretary rejects request for her browsing history as "vexatious"


[Read the post]


“Vexatious”. That’s a good word; I’m sure I could find an appropriate application for it…


If they think that’s too scattergun, try filing another FOI request for all browser history relating to the Wikipedia articles on these topics? I think it’d be genuinely useful to know what research she’s done on the issues her bill introduces…


maybe if you had particular search terms and whenever those search terms came up the browser history for that day.


Let them feed on their own medicine.


I am absolutely stunned the author of this letter did not sign it. How is this error possible, in this digital age?


causing or tending to cause annoyance, frustration, or worry.
“the vexatious questions posed by software copyrights”
denoting an action or the bringer of an action that is brought without sufficient grounds for winning, purely to cause annoyance to the defendant.

I’m using this word for the entire day, I simply reply “vexatious” to everything.




More info on rejection of an earlier, similar request:

So the biggest problem is the high risk of national security issues combined with the high volume of data, which makes redaction a significant piece of work (which can only be carried out by someone with a top security clearance!).

It’s also clear that ‘Fishing’ is generally discouraged anyway.

Think of something specific to search for, and try again…


Isn’t part of the point of the request to point out the invasive copying of citizens’ browser histories by UK government intelligence programs?


Aren’t “requests” rather soft, for treatment of public officials? How about “demands”? Citizens have a legitimate right to privacy, but officials need to be transparent.


What harm could there be? It’s just metadata.


So, kind of like “get a warrant” then. Except it only applies when the government is questioned. Got it!


Turned down for being “scattergun” and “fishing”. Oh the irony is just delicious!


So, May does understand precisely what is wrong with her plan. It’s just not vexatious as long as the consequences are borne by people who aren’t her.

(Also, I normally think that sniping at politicians based on appearance is petty and pointless; but is anyone else utterly creeped out by how closely May’s gradual change in appearance as she ages resembles the gradual transition from Senator Palpatine to Emperor Palpatine during the course of the Star Wars movies? Back when she was first kicking terrible ideas around she looked like just another hack; but her journey to the dark side is clearly sapping the vitality of her flesh-shell with unnatural speed.)


This goes so far beyond self-unawareness, I’m going to need new terms. Self-oblivious? Living-parody? Irony-supplement?





A simpler question to ask Theresa May would be - does she have dual Israeli and UK nationality and if so why? Where does her loyality lie, or does it just LIE!


“We reject your perfectly legal request because we feel that you have motivation for wanting that information.”