Some Thoughts on Fandom, Privacy, Money, and Other Stuff - Mo's Journal — LiveJournal
Some Thoughts on Fandom, Privacy, Money, and Other Stuff|
Maybe people should remember that the net isn't the privacy of their own home and that anything you do here might lead back to you someday. If you use that as a guideline then you should be safe.
Privacy online exists only as far as how much what you want to keep private is worth someone else's time to find out.
I've only half aware of the fan drama you're talking about and I don't really care about the details. My point is that information is never really secure online. You have to be prepared for the risk that you might run into someone online who's going to do whatever they want with your information if they get a hold it.
I don't see how my stating the reality of the situation can be seen as in any absolving anyone of anything.
|Date:||July 26th, 2008 01:36 am (UTC)|| |
I think the important thing to remember is - as I said in the original post - that these are two separate issues:
- The risk that unscrupulous people will misuse information you make available
- The ethics of misusing information
I was only talking about the first issue. The ethics of the second one pretty much need no comment.
|Date:||July 26th, 2008 01:40 am (UTC)|| |
That's an interesting viewpoint. I think that what you said was so obvious as to need no comment and that the ethical questions are most of what's being discussed - not only here, but all over lj.
Yeah, and they should remember that their home might not be secure; anyone who doesn't get heavy deadbolts and bars on their windows should just suck it up if they're burglarized; safety IRL only exists as far as they're able to protect it. [/sarcasm]
Saying "you should be more careful" is not the same as "the attackers shouldn't be penalized." Nor especially, "it's okay for them to attack like that; after all, the victim didn't take the right precautions."
And where exactly did I say "the attackers shouldn't be penalized" and "it's okay for them to attack like that; after all, the victim didn't take the right precautions,"?
All of this is coming from the fact that the kerfuffle started with a post about how to protect one's identity -- with the implication that anyone not taking those steps was fair game. The OP then proceeded to out someone in an ETA on that post. The issue is that in repeating the initial argument, you appear to be reiterating the idea the offender used as a potential defense.
I can see that you're not, but I thought you might like to know what's prompting the extreme reactions.
I know what's going on. I just resent people putting words in my mouth.
We all surf the net at our own risk. If someone get underhanded on you then you have a right to call foul. But not the right to act like you didn't know the risks in the first place.
That's all I have to say on the matter.
Your reply read as pretty hostile. I'm sorry if my attempt to explain reactions you seemed not to expect appeared in any way problematic.
|Date:||July 26th, 2008 01:05 pm (UTC)|| |
I think that was a very gracious response to what seems a trolling comment.