That does sound pretty insane on the face of it. Mind you, I think that Meta is wrong where he says ,i.Posting information about person X that person X publishes themselves on their public web pages should never be a TOS violation; that's just stupid. I think there's an enormous difference between, say, a full name or an e-mail address, and a full street address or work address. I know that keeping such information private online is like trying to hold back the tide, but holding back the tide is what all abuse teams are trying to do, and we hope that their sandbags last at least until the general public gets the message about how hard it really is and start to protect themselves appropriately.
And you're right about an incitement to violence. Publicising already public details is often used to deliberately make things harder for someone. If a newspaper print someone's personal details and they then get swamped with threatening or annoying contact, it's safe to say that however public the details were the paper is responsible for the level of the hassle. Most people don't bother to go and look for the details themselves...
no subject
Date: 2004-08-10 02:03 am (UTC)And you're right about an incitement to violence. Publicising already public details is often used to deliberately make things harder for someone. If a newspaper print someone's personal details and they then get swamped with threatening or annoying contact, it's safe to say that however public the details were the paper is responsible for the level of the hassle. Most people don't bother to go and look for the details themselves...