User:Louis Kyu Won Ryu/Outing

a few questions about the fairness of outing someone:
 * 1) has the person in question been contacted?
 * 2) where is the a trail of evidence?
 * 3) how has the evidence been handled?
 * 4) who has the power?
 * 5) does one outing deserve another?

-- 142.154.114.134 07:01, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * 1) do you mean the person who was outed or the person who did the outing? Either way, both parties are aware of the existence of this page.
 * 2) evidence of what? The only evidence that outing occured is on the mailing list, as the article stated.
 * 3) to do what?
 * 4) no. That's like asking "do two wrongs make a right".
 * 1) no. That's like asking "do two wrongs make a right".

-- Angela. 07:40, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Accidental outing is sloppy. Deliberate outing, generally, is a betrayal of trust, at least where the perp has obtained identity information as a result of an extension of trust. Outing someone based on, for example, the contents of server logs, is a betrayal of trust on the part of the server operator except perhaps if the release of information is consistent with a site's privacy policy (Fair outing). I would think that fair outing, if done at all, should be done in a deliberate, considerate, careful fashion; probably with prior notice; most assuredly not as the result of a whim of the moment.

There are cases where someone might, through investigation, seek to uncover the identity of someone in an effort to out them against their will. Such instances raise fewer ethical questions since they do not involve an extension of trust that was later betrayed. Within some communities, though, the right to anonymity is sufficiently entrenched that any community member responsible for such outing would be sanctioned.

Louis Kyu Won Ryu


 * As there was never a serious challenge to this view, fair outing now points to a outing policy. Debate it there not here. Housework 03:40, 3 April 2006 (UTC)