Difference between revisions of "Talk:Pathfinders"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m |
|||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
:Maybe he didn't want to have any identifying information available on the Internet. Whatever the reason, I think it was within his rights. - [[User:Mpnolan|Mpnolan]] 16:51, 25 Dec 2005 (EST) | :Maybe he didn't want to have any identifying information available on the Internet. Whatever the reason, I think it was within his rights. - [[User:Mpnolan|Mpnolan]] 16:51, 25 Dec 2005 (EST) | ||
::Within his rights yes, but we weren't giving out email addresses or anything. Just a list of names for historical purposes. I don't see the threat to his privacy. -[[User:Chrax|Chrax]] | ::Within his rights yes, but we weren't giving out email addresses or anything. Just a list of names for historical purposes. I don't see the threat to his privacy. -[[User:Chrax|Chrax]] | ||
+ | :::From the information you could determine, for example, that he went to MASMC and then the name of the university he went to next. That's information about him, which could even lead one to discover more. Of however tiny degree we perceive them to be, I consider his desire to keep those private of higher value than a minor discrepancy in the archive. - [[User:Mpnolan|Mpnolan]] 21:32, 28 Dec 2005 (EST) |
Revision as of 02:32, 29 December 2005
I don't understand why we ought to remove a person's name. Was any reason given? -Chrax
- No, but he sent me an email saying he wanted to be completely removed. Must be a communist sympathizer or something. -Squishypickle
- Maybe he didn't want to have any identifying information available on the Internet. Whatever the reason, I think it was within his rights. - Mpnolan 16:51, 25 Dec 2005 (EST)
- Within his rights yes, but we weren't giving out email addresses or anything. Just a list of names for historical purposes. I don't see the threat to his privacy. -Chrax
- From the information you could determine, for example, that he went to MASMC and then the name of the university he went to next. That's information about him, which could even lead one to discover more. Of however tiny degree we perceive them to be, I consider his desire to keep those private of higher value than a minor discrepancy in the archive. - Mpnolan 21:32, 28 Dec 2005 (EST)
- Within his rights yes, but we weren't giving out email addresses or anything. Just a list of names for historical purposes. I don't see the threat to his privacy. -Chrax