Django posted:D2 posted:Django posted:D2 posted:Django posted:
Face Book post with the links as source exposes people , these people are in their own groups and their friends. Respect their privacy within their groups.
I have pointed it out , you have exposed your own self ,your post was deleted from the comments in that group.
The internet is for all intents and purposes open source. If you are creating a darknet hen make sure it stays dark. As long as the information is available and that it is not protected by the usual legal guidelines it is fair play. We post Stabroekenews info daily here and it is a for pay site. Facebook is free and allows the option for users to protect their own data or not. If I can run a search program and it can get to the data it is fair game to quote it to disseminate it and to link to it. I do not know of a case where someone claims a link to their open data damaged them and the one creating the link is liable. Facebook, twitter, Instagram, etc are all data sources to be mined and used if you can access them.
Members on the forum wants to stay hidden ,why should facebook links be posted here to expose others ? i think it's double standard.
Members may want to stay hidden but we are a small community so by inference and silly mistakes like Ugli made we can infer who they are with some degree of precision. Nothing stops such reasoning.
If the people on Facebook want to stay hidden to write then there are certainly others who want to know who is writing.
If they write with their own name then they do not care about privacy. Facebook makes its money selling this data so they also do not respect privacy.
Do you suggest we should go thru the backdoor ,to see what the people are writing on facebook ? who belongs to groups ,where their post are only seen by their friends or friends of friends .
If the back door means being a trojan member of a group...definitely! If t here is public discourse on going one joins because of interest and if the interest is such that others pretend they are exclusive and sanction others based on arbitrary criteria then I say be a greek and act a trojan.
The point I am making is that your duty is not to take it upon yourself to decide what is accepted speech beyond the usual. All members here bear the legal responsibility for their actions as the disclaimer informs us. We are liable for libelous, slanderous speech.
You are to moderate as the word implies...temper the speech such that it is not trolling, not unusually disruptive, not obscene, is not harassing of members here and that it is what would generally be considered appropriate for public viewing. You cannot set yourself as arbiter of what are appropriate data sources, topics or references. That makes you adopting the awful censorship model of the Chinese. We already agreed that if someone is not a member here; is not a public figure; has not commented publicly on the topic being discussed;, we do not have a right to speak of them. That is as much discretion one can give to privacy. As long as a person involved themselves in a discussion on a topic, we can speak to their opinions. If they commented on the private persona of another we also have a right to speak to compare theirs to their statements. It is only fair.
What people write on facebook does not come with any top security protocol or any special copy-write privileges. If it is available for public access by members and a member posts it here; the group can kick the member out. You do not have to take it upon your self to be arbiter of what you presume they would want or not want. In that instance we might as well de-fang our ourselves and cut off our own tongues because there are always people who not want any link of dissemination to their data or discussion about what they do.