2009/9/9 <wjhonson(a)aol.com>om>:
I really don't see this as IAR.
It seems the argument is that it's firmly BLP policy. That for some
reason (inexplicable apparently), keeping the name of a kipnap victim
secret, helps them to not be killed. Personally the argument seems
flat to me. But at any rate, if we were to have a discussion on
finding consensus, I would expect it to revolve around BLP.
BLP talks about removing unverifiable harmful information about living
people, it doesn't say verifiable harmful information should be
removed (unless it is given undue weight).