Staff Vote: Redaction Policy

[TySixtus]

As per this thread, and regarding if/when staff should redact first and last names:

http://www.talkrational.org/showthre...08#post2328208

Here is the relevant section of the charter that deals with the posting of personal information:

(3) Posting Standards

(3.1) All forums will display individual rules for tolerance of insults.
(3.2) Members are expected to post according to the rules of the forum.
(3.3) Posts outside this tolerance may be moved.
(3.4) Members have the right to be protected from harassment.
(3.5) Posts will not be moved for swearing.
(3.6) Posts will only be edited or deleted to remove duplicate posts, spam, malicious code or links to malicious code, illegal content, and members' personal data not posted with their explicit permission. Members may request for staff to edit/delete their own posts after the 120-minute edit period expires, but the integrity of the thread will take precedence.
(3.7) Personal data that will be removed automatically includes telephone numbers, home addresses, IP addresses, and financial account information, including social security numbers, credit card numbers, bank account numbers, etc. Also, personal information that has explicitly been given the no-go by a member in the past will be deleted automatically. Other types of personal information may be deleted or edited at the request of the person the info belongs to.

You will notice that section 3.7 mentions "other types of personal information" and states that it "may be deleted." We are trying to make this a more concrete principle, at least when it comes to a person's name.

In the above-listed thread, the admins came to a (tentative) agreement on the following:

1) If the poster whose first name is being used has already been revealed by them, and on TR, it is fair game.
2) If they have not revealed it here, it should be redacted if the member requests it to be.
3) First and last names (when used together) or last names by themselves, are automatically redacted unless the member is okay with them being posted (we already do this).
4) Any exceptions (e.g. in the case of public figures who have a problem with their name being posted, or a poster who has revealed their name prior but now wants it redacted for personal/security reasons, etc) should be discussed and resolved as quickly as possible by the admins.


If you don't like this, vote "No" but please state why so we can come to a consensus (eventually!).

[Brother Daniel]

points #1 and #2 seem to clash with #3 where first names are concerned. Or is #3 only about first-and-last names being used together, or what?

[ksen]

points #1 and #2 seem to clash with #3 where first names are concerned. Or is #3 only about first-and-last names being used together, or what?

I took number 3 to mean if the first and last names are used together.

[Monad]

Yeah but how together? Same post, same thread? I've seen people trying to game the rules by posting the first name in one post, then the surname or something that sounds like it in another.

I think the point should just be if the person doesn't want their surname posted it should be redacted, but if it's a first name and they already used it on the forum then it's fair game - cat's out of the bag.

So seems to me point 2 is superfluous if we already have 1 and 3 in place

[schneibler elf]

i voted no simply because i don't agree with redacting first names for pretty much any reason, and I also don't think the whole "revealed here" distinction is a meaningful one.

[TySixtus]

I took number 3 to mean if the first and last names are used together.

I was attempting to provide clarity (which didn't work, apparently!) on the situation where a first and last name are used together. Right now, we almost always just redact them immediately, unless we know a member has no problem with them being posted.

I added an edit to the OP, so hopefully it is less confusing.

ETA: And I further edited to clarify that last names by themselves are also automatically redacted.

[schneibler elf]

might want to edit it again to say something like: last names and/or first and last names used together

[TySixtus]

Yeah, X-edited, I did that.

[TySixtus]

i voted no simply because i don't agree with redacting first names for pretty much any reason, and I also don't think the whole "revealed here" distinction is a meaningful one.

It is an arbitrary distinction, but I think it is meaningful because it allows us to deal with the current situation, i.e. someone reveals their name on TR and then has a hissy fit about it later. If you reveal it here, oh well.

I've made my feelings on this known before, but the posting of someone's name or personal stuff is just the most shit-postey thing you can do, imo. It is just so terribly dumb, and it is not a coincidence that the worst posters do it in order to get a rise out of other people. Plus it never ends there, once people start going on the prowl for a poster's name, they ending up doing dumb shit like posting a picture of their house.

I personally don't think any of that garbage belongs here. Others are free to disagree, of course.

[schneibler elf]

i think when you strip away all of those thoughts and feelings you aren't left with much. shitposting isn't against the rules, getting a rise out of people isn't, dumb isn't, etc.

i think the only real factor should be whether it causes some sort of material harm or it doesn't. i think it doesn't.

[TySixtus]

We prohibit things here that don't cause material harm, so I don't view that as a particular bar we have to hurdle. Sure, they're my feelings or whatever, but I'd like to think they are grounded in some kind of principle, in this case that the board isn't a complete sewer.

I can't think of a single instance where a person's first name was dug up by a shitheel, and then it just ended there. People get their place of business posted, a picture of their house, threats to call their work, etc.

I guess that's a slippery slope argument, and if so I'm okay with that. I would just prefer we keep all of that dumb shit off the board. It is the refuge of the stupid. I never see the people whose opinions I respect ever engaging in it -- most posters (including most of the so-called Lulz Brigade, and I posted that because I bet Pendarica is reading this!) don't do it. Probably because they recognize how desperate it is, and how lame.

Finally, with people like Schneibster running around, allowing other users to "out" other posters kind of sets a shitty, maybe dangerous, precedent. There are posters here who get enjoyment out of digging up dirt on people, and perhaps fucking with them in real life. Let's not even come close to allowing that. Just keep names out of it. It is simple, and it should stop the majority of that kind of desperate shitposting.

[schneibler elf]

i have posted first names. i'm pretty sure you have (even if you later redacted it and said it was "to prove a point" or whatever). lots of people have done so. i think it's an exaggeration to suggest that it is only the shneibsters and danbys and what not that have done it.

to me this is similar to if you started following around someone saying "poop" after all of their posts, in every single thread, for a long time, and finally it was decided that it was harassment, so you banned the word "poop."

[Bilirubin]

request an option C: Ban DanB

[Supernaut]

Lol

[divagreen]

i have posted first names. i'm pretty sure you have (even if you later redacted it and said it was "to prove a point" or whatever). lots of people have done so. i think it's an exaggeration to suggest that it is only the shneibsters and danbys and what not that have done it.

to me this is similar to if you started following around someone saying "poop" after all of their posts, in every single thread, for a long time, and finally it was decided that it was harassment, so you banned the word "poop."

so are you actually wanting to address the person following around some1 and saying poop after everything they posted

cos I thought you were against that sort of thing

or is this another time where you pretend to be dumb and act like doc-dropping isn't being used for malicious purposes cos I can't tell

[schneibler elf]

Good lord you're an idiot

[Brother Daniel]

diva, regardless of how annoying it would be if someone followed someone else around and posted "poop" after everything they posted, I think we can all agree that banning the word "poop" would be a really dumb way to respond to such a problem.

tBe's point is simply that banning the use of RL first names (or redacting them all the time), as a response to the problem of people posting RL first names in order to bug people, is similarly dumb.

[ksen]

I don't think I like #1 or #2 because I don't consider just a first name as being personally identifiable anymore than a car model is. It's when last names get involved that it gets personally identifying.

This is all just imo though.

[divagreen]

diva, regardless of how annoying it would be if someone followed someone else around and posted "poop" after everything they posted, I think we can all agree that banning the word "poop" would be a really dumb way to respond to such a problem.

tBe's point is simply that banning the use of RL first names (or redacting them all the time), as a response to the problem of people posting RL first names in order to bug people, is similarly dumb.

I got the point.

my point was wondering if he was working himself up to wanting to address the underlying issue of harassment and where his boundaries lie. <---- which is pretty idiotic since I don't think tBe really cares.

I don't think I like #1 or #2 because I don't consider just a first name as being personally identifiable anymore than a car model is. It's when last names get involved that it gets personally identifying.

This is all just imo though.

I have a pretty unique first name. mebbe I am not the only 1.

it would be shitty to allow first names to be used based on what is popular in the us for names.

even if I pretended that tr had a soul conscience, there are a bunch of crappy ways to weasel out of this if you give room for first names to be abused whenever some1 gets mad at some1 else. it is almost like every1 is pretending this hasn't happened yet.

[Danby]

If we imagine it, it must be true.

[ksen]

I have a pretty unique first name. mebbe I am not the only 1.

I don't have a problem with making concessions for unique type first names. But I don't think we need to have a policy in place that throws everything out for the sake of rare circumstances.

[brugroffil]

What is the potential downside of someone being able to request that their first name be redacted

[Pandora]

I don't have a problem with making concessions for unique type first names. But I don't think we need to have a policy in place that throws everything out for the sake of rare circumstances.

I don't even think needs to be all that rare of a name, if you can combine it with other piece of information. For example, there are only 13 actuaries in the entire state of Washington who are named "John"... the single most common male name in the US. I don't care how "innocent" it might seem, I don't want my first name bandied about on TR.

[Quizalufagus]

I don't even think needs to be all that rare of a name, if you can combine it with other piece of information. For example, there are only 13 actuaries in the entire state of Washington who are named "John"... the single most common male name in the US. I don't care how "innocent" it might seem, I don't want my first name bandied about on TR.

This is a pretty crucial point. And tbf there's no reason to allow anyone to post real first names when a member doesn't want his or her name being used. There is absolutely no legitimate purpose behind allowing that.

[Danby]

legitimate purpose

TR has adopted a new standard.