On 6/18/07, Matthew Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/18/07, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
This shows an astonishing ignorance of the effects that a person's comments can have on another.
It doesn't make jayjg's statement any less true, however. Regardless of whether he should have acted as he did, there is no breach of privacy involved, unless you extend the definition of privacy to go beyond real-world identities, which I think is a bit of a stretch.
It's information which, though not specifically protected by WP privacy policy (either meta or en-specific), obviously a wide variety of people are upset to have widely disseminated.
Again: I think the info release met the letter of the current CU and general privacy policies. The gap is that the spirit of those policies and community expectations are stricter than that.
If the new expectation going forwards from this is that everything not specifically and explicitly protected by WP privacy policy is free game for people to reveal on a whim, then there's a serious problem on several levels.