I usually consider that BLP should be used very restrictively, but if there ever was a case where do no harm applies, it is this, not the convoluted arguments of possible harm to felons where it is usually raised. I would have done just as JW did (except I would have done it just as OTRS) . I can not imagine being willing to take the personal responsibility of publishing this. There is an argument otherwise, but that's abstract, and people judge differently when it is not abstract, but a known individual.
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 11:03 AM, Gwern Branwen<gwe...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Durova<nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Gwern: see the Ken Hechtman example above. In 2001 a Canadian journalist >> who was held by the Taliban did have his life endangered by news coverage. >> >> -Durova >> > > Yes, I read it. I don't think it comes *anywhere* near proving your > sweeping proposition that this sort of censorship is justified. They > claimed they were going to execute him and were doing mock executions > before any news broke; after the news broke, they... went on doing > naughty things. Yeah. Not a very good example. > Sure, he may have 'thought' he had convinced them to let him go, but > that conviction is worth about as far as one can throw it; I remember > hearing that the Vietnamese and Iranian hostage takers liked to taunt > their prisoners in a similar manner. > > -- > gwern > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l