Curious "Experiment" (non-explicit R-Rated)

[mwfanelli]

This is really weird and something I don't usually keep track of. But it caught my interest this time.

A guy named Jason decided to do an experiment on Craigslist:

"On Monday, a Seattle web developer named Jason Fortuny started his own Craigslist experiment. The goal: 'Posing as a submissive woman looking for an aggressive dom, how many responses can we get in 24 hours?' He took the text and photo from a sexually explicit ad in another area, reposted it to Craigslist Seattle, and waited for the responses to roll in ... '178 responses, with 145 photos of men in various states of undress. Responses include full e-mail addresses (both personal and business addresses), names, and in some cases IM screen names and telephone numbers.' In a staggering move, he then published every single response, unedited and uncensored, with all photos and personal information to Encyclopedia Dramatica."

Ignoring the fact that it was sexually based (it could have been anything embarassing), what do you think about the actions of Jason and, more importantly, the men who responded? Why would all these men include such personal information, using real names, real email address, phone numbers, and other legitimate identifiable information? Would you ever be that careless?

Some people say that Jason broke the law by publishing what the responders sent him. Others say that there is no expectation of privacy when you knowingly send internet strangers your personal information and photos via email. Many "victims" have threatened to sue but none have yet. Worse yet, the internet spiders have probably hit these pages already, preserving these guy's comments forever in Web Heaven.

I find this to be a very weird and odd case. At first blush, I side with Jason. Although it was a childish and pointless prank, I can't see how any privacy laws were broken. Should Jason have played nanny to these very stupid men and protected them from their own ignorance? Any comments or opinions?

From Slashdot: http://www.waxy.org/archive/2006/09/08/sex_bait.shtml

[julsoph]

Well, honestly, I think these guys put themselves out there and paid the consequence for it. If you're going to send a nekkid pic of yourself to someone you don't even know, then you need to be prepared for whatever happens, you know? I can't see that he actually broke any laws by doing what he did.
Also, while I have certain expectations of friends or family as far as privacy goes...these men emailed a perfect stranger and are expecting that he would respect their privacy. That would be like posting your deepest darkest secrets on a public forum, and expecting people to file it away and realize it's confidential. Common sense is always a good thing.
That being said, I think he's a gigantic shmuck for doing that...it's just mean, and he didn't have to post ALL of the info to prove whatever point he was trying to make with his experiment.

Emily

[another view]

I agree with Emily - maybe a little more with the first paragraph than the second... He could have ruined the lives of the people who responded who weren't public about their, um... hobbies, but they did voluntarily respond to someone they didn't know.

[julsoph]

I agree with Emily - maybe a little more with the first paragraph than the second... He could have ruined the lives of the people who responded who weren't public about their, um... hobbies, but they did voluntarily respond to someone they didn't know.

Oh...I absolutely agree! The responsibility goes back to them every time...but I just think he didn't HAVE to post all their info, just because he could...
But yes, even saying that...he couldn't have posted their info + pics if they hadn't sent them to him.

[adina]

Hello.

You send someone you don't know naked pictures of yourself on the internet, you deserve whatever results you get. It's a HUGE risk. If you're going to take it, you can deal with the consequences.

How do you think they catch those online child predetors. Pretend they are someone they are not, get the info, nab the guy.

[mwfanelli]

How do you think they catch those online child predetors. Pretend they are someone they are not, get the info, nab the guy.

To stir the pot... is catching child sexual predators (a felony to commit) on the same level as outing two consenting adults agreeing to meet for something?

[zrfraser]

To stir the pot... is catching child sexual predators (a felony to commit) on the same level as outing two consenting adults agreeing to meet for something?

No I would say not. Should Jason have published what he found? Probably not, but it wasn't illegal. Unethical? I would say yes, but illegal? No. I don't send information out on the internet like that, nor do I send anything out on the internet that could come back to haunt me (not that I'm implying that I have anything like that to post). At least they learned a lesson albeit a hard learned one.

Z

[julsoph]

No I would say not. Should Jason have published what he found? Probably not, but it wasn't illegal. Unethical? I would say yes, but illegal? No. I don't send information out on the internet like that, nor do I send anything out on the internet that could come back to haunt me (not that I'm implying that I have anything like that to post). At least they learned a lesson albeit a hard learned one.

Z

This is what I was trying to say, Z just did a much better job...lol.

[adina]

To stir the pot... is catching child sexual predators (a felony to commit) on the same level as outing two consenting adults agreeing to meet for something?

No, it's not the same. But when you are sending your info out online to someone you have never met, how do you know if you are getting a consenting adult, or a big perv? You don't. You take your chances. And you deal with the repercussions.

[adina]

To stir the pot more...

Suppose instead of publishing the info online, he lured them to a deserted area and hacked them up.

In a rose-tinted world, sure, everyone you find online is going to be innocent and honest. Reality, well, that's a different story. To blindly trust someone online, especially when it is something of a sexual nature, is, to put it bluntly, stupid.

[mwfanelli]

Suppose instead of publishing the info online, he lured them to a deserted area and hacked them up.

So, perhaps, the "punishment" of having your fetish publicized is a smaller price to pay than what could have happened?

I'm not sure that an adult would be so trusting as to be lured to some obviously dangerous area. But hey, maybe they would!

Here's an auxillary question: Is there anything any of you have written right here on this web site that you now wish wasn't there for the public to see?

[adina]

So, perhaps, the "punishment" of having your fetish publicized is a smaller price to pay than what could have happened?

I'd prefer a blow to my pride over a blow to my head. And consider it a lesson learned.

[another view]

I agree that catching child predators is not the same as two (at least posing as) consenting adults. Of course, a 15 year-old could be saying they're 19 and look it... If they're under 18 so it's a whole different scenario.

So, perhaps, the "punishment" of having your fetish publicized is a smaller price to pay than what could have happened?

A big price, but not quite as big. Like Adina said, if you don't know who you're dealing with then it could be anybody. In a perfect world, if two consenting adults want to find each other and do what they want then that's none of my business. If one of them is mis-representing themselves then that's when things can get wierd.

I'm not sure that an adult would be so trusting as to be lured to some obviously dangerous area. But hey, maybe they would!

I'd guess that the type of people we're talking about might be a little different in this respect too... No evidence or statistics, just a guess...

Here's an auxillary question: Is there anything any of you have written right here on this web site that you now wish wasn't there for the public to see?

Probably. Nothing that comes to mind at the moment and way too many to look thru!