Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction
I just think the precautionary principle should apply as the internet is too large of forum to ridicule someone on for such a small offense. The pleasure that some people get from doing it doesn't seem like it outweighs the problems that could occur from it.
|
Pleasure vs problems isn't the question that has to be answered though IMO, it's problems vs the alternatives. The alternative is to restrict the publishing of all public photography, which is impossible and the harm from that would be much greater than the harm of bullies doing what they're going to do with or without public photography.
Just to confirm, you don't have any problem with her actions being publicly visible right? Whoever strolls by and sees this scenario isn't the problem, the problem is that the Internet is far larger right?
What if 10 people see her while walking by? What if those 10 people each tell 10 friends? What if the person is a public figure so word spreads more, each of those 10 friends tell 10 friends etc? Where is the line between an acceptable audience for a public act and an unacceptable one?
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction
Just a hypothetical question, but if this lady contacted you and said that someone saw the picture on this site and threatened her or violated her over it, would the problem still be only be with the bully?
|
Of course, I can't take responsibility for someone else's actions, and I can't be so fearful that anything I do might precipitate some unintended consequence.
If I behaved that way a VERY large percentage of posts and threads would be deleted.
I should be expected to take reasonable precautions. If I tell a joke about someone's mother and I'm in a support group for people with dead parents, then I'm not taking a reasonable precaution. If I'm with friends and someone with a dead mother overhears the joke, snaps and kills someone, I won't be responsible for that.