Toto

I would not want to make a blanket statement about how wrong it is to post private information without hearing Till's side of it. It appears that the information was not really private, and the complaint is not based on a breach of privacy but on the idea that the post was an invitation to harrass Turkel. We have no evidence that the readers of the Skeptical Review or of this board are likely to engage in that sort of conduct, or that any harrassment has occurred. On the other hand, the Internet Infidels does have a policy for the boards that discourages this sort of post, and it seems the better part of discretion to edit out the information. I think that too much is being made of this.

I am a minor player in this debate. Layman was in full force before I popped in to inform him that the evil he was complaining about had been corrected.

Toto

If your name is known, and your phone number is not unlisted, this is not private information. The name of your spouse is not private information - it is in a public record. If your spouse has a government job, that is a matter of public record.

The only objection to gathering this public information and putting it in a newsletter or on a website is that it might tend to provoke harrassment. So the question of whether this harrassment is likely is highly relevant. When you publish the name and address of a doctor who performs abortions to a group of thugs who think they have license to harrass or murder anyone who performs abortions, you are violating that doctor's rights and probably guilty of encouraging a crime.

But if you publish the name of a spouse and the spouse's job in the case of a large campaign contributor, you may be publishing information that is relevant to a public issue. So I don't think that there can be a blanket rule on publishing this sort of information.

Evangelion

As the Christian to whom the following words were originally spoken, I feel moved to comment.

Ahh, it all comes back to me now! The petty jibes; the wanton misrepresentation; the hypocrisy; the blatant lies. Yes, yes... that soft, sweet music... play it again, Turkel!

I had the dubious privilege of debating this lad on a Christian fundamentalist Website. (www.theologyonline.com) I lost count of the number of logical fallacies Turkel used during the course of this debate, and I noticed with considerable interest that his cheerleader squad just didn't seem to recognise them. (Funny, that...)

Was I surprised when, some time afterwards, a heavily edited (read "hatchet job") version of this debate found its way onto his Website, complete with an unsupported assertion that I had actually failed to answer one of his arguments? (I had answered it, and I had presented a counter-argument - which was consistently ignored, no matter how many times I continued to present it.)

No, I was not surprised. It's par for the course with Turkel.

Vorkosigan

I have posted all of that data. The link is here

<a href="http://users2.ev1.net/~turton/newlife2.html" target="_blank">http://users2.ev1.net/~turton/newlife2.html</a>

Because of that link, we have never been harassed. On the contrary, we have met many wonderful people and hosted several people visiting Taiwan or coming here to teach English. The experience has been fine.

Vorkosigan

Vorkosigan

One more time. I do not object to the information that Holding himself has revealed

...then you cannot object to the information Till has posted, since Holding tells us how to go about getting it, and gives it away when asked.

Nope, but the State of Florida is required by law to reveal information. And, they did not single out one person, write a hit piece on him, post it in a place frequented by opponents of the guy, and then list all his family information and home phone number.

Yes, but your claim is that SecWeb is "hostile" and this information is being released to the wrong hands. Your "hit piece" description is absurd, and reality has already refuted your position, since the information has been out there for many years, and Turkel has not reported increased harassment. The piece is designed to make Turkel look like a fool -- a bit of overkill, that -- and nobody wastes time harassing fools. As we have seen, since that info has been known for many years.

You cannot object to that information being here without objecting to it being made available by the State of Florida. That something is "legal" does not make it moral, neh? -- as you have been claiming.

Also, the State of Florida not only includes his home phone number, but his legal signature, the information on his partners, and certain tax information for his non-profit. It in fact reveals what is arguably more information about him.

Just more cheap shots. You seem to have become quite a bitter, and deeply unfair, contributor Volk. That's a shame.

Layman, you were the one starting off this thread with comments about "hostility" and "demonization." If you hadn't started out that way, you wouldn't have everyone reminding you who is really doing the harassment and the killing in our country. When was the last time a group of atheists got together to oppose legislation giving gays equal rights? Are abortion doctors wearing flak vests because of atheist harassment? When was the last time the plaintiffs in a prayer case got death threats from atheists? Harassment all runs one way in the US.

I have specifically mentioned his home address, family information, and home phone number.

I have specifically already pointed out, a lot more information than that is publicly available, and Holding tells you where you can get it when he informs you that he has registered Tekton with both US and British authorities. Really, that's the end of it.

Suppose you had simply started off by not demonizing the SecWeb as a bunch of madmen who at any moment might call Robert Turkel and perform harassment, and simply quietly noted that you had a problem with the mention of this information. Then we might have had a civil exchange about the issue. But I guess your motive here isn't really about righting wrongs, is it?

Vorkosigan

Evangelion

Vorkosigan -

Out of curiosity, how does this compare with the average size of a house in Taiwan? Looks like you've got a mighty fine place there - and the view is absolutely gorgeous.

Vorkosigan

No exaggeration -- this is the finest house I've ever seen in this price range. There's no comparison. We pay US$300 a month for this. It's not just big and well made, it feels airy and light. To get a house this good up in Taipei, the capital, would be at least 7-10 times as much. This property is cheap, since it is far from anything, at least what the Taiwanese conceive of as "far" -- a five minute ride.

Most Taiwan housing is cramped, poorly made, and has no yard of any sort. We've lived in those. This one is another world. My friends and my wife's family are incredibly jealous of us.

The best part is, a local Buddhist Foundation is putting up a university next door, so I will be able to transfer there in a couple of years.

I should add that even more personal information is splattered all over my <a href="http://users2.ev1.net/~turton/teach_index.html" target="_blank">Taiwan Site</a>. I can be accused of a moral lapse here, but not of hypocrisy.

Michael

[ December 09, 2002: Message edited by: Vorkosigan ]</p>

MrKrinkles

galiel,

I am all growed up and I don't think posting people's personal information against their wishes is a good thing, generally speaking. As has been mentioned before, though, Turkel's personal information was already available publically before Till wrote his article, and Turkel was claiming that he no longer cared if people knew his name.

This is a dead issue.

If someone steals from me, I would try to take back whatever they stole.

Brooks

[ December 09, 2002: Message edited by: MrKrinkles ]</p>

Butters

All this talk about poor Turkel's privacy being invaded, no comments about what a total wack job the guy is. Good diversion!

Evangelion

Michael -

I'm impressed. Having just spent a fair amount of time learning more about Taiwan (thanks to your tremendously comprehensive Website), I now recognise the full extent of your accommodation coup. Hard to believe that you're in a well-serviced area, but still have the luxury of that mountain view! Incredible!

Sounds great. I wish you all the best with it.