[tor-relays] Help the Tor Project by running a fast unpublished bridge

[Sebastian G. <bastik.tor>]

Roger Dingledine:
> Hi folks,
> 
> In addition to the "get many fast exit relays" plan, that same funder
> (Voice of America) wants us to run a pile of fast stable unpublished
> bridges. We'll give the bridge addresses out manually to their target
> users over the coming months.
> (...) 

> We do have some funding for this, but I'm hoping that we can get enough
> volunteers so we can put the money toward more fast exits and better QA
> and build automation for the Tor bundles. So if you have good connectivity
> but can't run an exit, this is a great way to contribute.
> (...)

I might be overreacting (especially since nobody else replies), but
doesn't that split up Tor users in (two) groups?

Instead of having a larger pool (of bridges) for anyone you ask for
unpublished bridges which will be handed to "privileged" people.

Volunteers running unpublished bridges and giving them to friends in
$restrictive_country is one thing and their private choice. The same is
valid for a funder that pays for unpublished bridges. It appears fine to
me that a funder can make such choices.

You ask volunteers to achieve a funders goal. Those might run a bridge
already, but "un-publish" it. Less bridges for the rest. They could run
relays and turn them into unpublished bridges. Less relays for anyone.

Running a relay or bridge (published) would be a better contribution IMO.

Some were "upset" about funding for exits, because the Tor Project could
become dependent to the funding. 125+ exits is a huge number, but I
didn't "distrust" your judgment. However now I'm upset that the
unpublished bridges hurt the network. It's hurting the network to
achieve a funders goal. To me that's the wrong way.

Please read "you" as "the Tor Project" and "your" as "the Tor
Projects'", because I did not intend to address this to you, as Roger.

Regards,
Sebastian