[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re:



>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>[email protected] (Lefty) says,
>
>lef> and then treats us to what he purports to be Mr. Nalbandian's phone number
>lef> and address.
>...
>lef> Whoever you are, nobody, you're a hypocrite and a coward.
>
>Well, it wasn't me, but in any event I dispute this.  The use of anonymous
>remailers does not make one a coward, any more than the use of a pseudonym
>does (or is your given name "Lefty")?

Certainly the use of an anonymous remailer in and of itself it doesn't make
one either a coward or a hypocrite.  However, invading someone's privacy by
posting their telephone number and home address is a hypocritical act for
anyone who expects others to respect their own privacy.  Moreover, doing so
anonymously is cowardly.

And, yes, my using my long-standing nickname, "Lefty", is _quite_ different
from posting anonymously.  You can reply directly to me using my email
address, <[email protected]>, which appears in the header of everything I
post; moreover, I am responsible for what I post using that ID.

See it up there?  You can easily determine who I am from that information.

<[email protected]> is, in effect, a True Name.  <[email protected]> is
not.  <[email protected]> is not.

>As for the privacy aspect, I believe it may serve the interests of those
>who desire privacy to point out privacy lapses.  Not all the time, but
>sometimes you have to say, "the emperor has no clothes".

It is not the case that anybody "pointed out a privacy lapse" here.  On the
contrary, someone _committed_ a privacy lapse by obtaining and posting Mr.
Nalbandian's phone number and address _specifically_ as an incitement for
people to harass him.  This _is_ an invasion of privacy.  Are you somehow
failing to see that?

>For example, would you object to this:
>
>[email protected]  = Eric Robison <[email protected]>
>[email protected] = Derek M. Harkins <[email protected]>             
>   *
>[email protected] = Joe Baptista <[email protected]>
>
>The anonymous remailer is not so anonymous, is it?  Should I have kept
>the information to myself, or am I right to publicize it?

What you have supplied represents an invasion of privacy as well, in my
opinion.  If you were to explain how you came by this information, _that_
might be worth sharing, but simply presenting a mapping of anonyms to
truenyms is not.

--
Lefty ([email protected])
C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:.