Quote from: shorena on October 03, 2015, 06:25:25 AM

I votes yes, I just hope this will not lead to more drama.

Of course it will lead to more drama. For those that are outed for using alts, they'll scream and cry. Similarly, those that are identified as alts and really aren't, will scream and cry.

There definitely will be some drama - some from those that are busted, and some from those that are innocent - but they'll both be singing the same tune. So how will anyone know what the truth is. The OP clearly states, it may identify alts.

I have a few questions about this:

How can anyone absolutely prove the accuracy of this kind of analysis? Without knowing that, I can see that innocent accounts could fall victim to being wrongly identified.

Even though the raw data is publicly available, is it reasonable to examine personal trust habits of all BCT users? And then to share publicly that analysis?

To make a comparison, just because a person goes out in public, to work, to the store, to the post office, to dinner, (all in the public view mind you), it is not deemed legal (nor appropriate in my opinion) to follow them about and inspect their personal life. So much so even, that there are laws against that, at least in my country, the USA.

I wholeheartedly believe, that I would be charged with stalking, if just wanted to do my own in-depth analysis of my insurance agent, and followed him about to see who else he interacts with and who he trusts, by following him to different appointments with clients, when he goes to lunch and follow him to where he lives. I don't think the US Courts would find anything impressive in a defense of, "I was just performing my own trust analysis of my insurance agent. I didn't invade his privacy. I only followed him around in public."

Heres another quick comparison. Just because I can walk up and down my residential street and see lots of windows open and without any curtains drawn, does not make it okay for me to walk up to each window and take a picture of the inside of the houses on my street (publicly viewed information). What if I then take those photos, make a compiled list (analysis) of the details of say, everyone's televisions (or whatever), then buy billboard space and list all of that information for public view. Is that okay?

Here's my last question to everyone: are you okay with this analysis being used for personal purposes other than identifying alts?

There's another current thread about, is doxxing okay. There seems to be a debate about that. But after all, it's just public information right? So it's no big deal to share it, right? :-) (let's not have a doxxing discussion here).

I truly and genuinely compliment Dogie for publicly asking this question, since I'm at least one person that brought this question to mind. So I am curious to know people's response as well.

From my personal experience, earlier this week, because of this analysis, Dogie politely PM'd me and asked why I had removed him from my personal trust. As we exchanged some PM's I was amazed to find out that my personal trust list was publicly available. I hadn't complained about it, because I didn't know. Next I was amazed to know that someone had been looking at the trust of little ol' me. A rather quiet person on this forum. And finally I was amazed that I was being essentially asked, why don't you trust me. It was a private decision that I made. Now I was being asked about my private decision?

So yes, I did feel that it was an intrusion of my privacy.

Would you consider that an intrusion of privacy?

Quote from: Athertle on October 03, 2015, 02:05:10 AM

If they thought it was a "personal intrusion" then why haven't they complained about the publicity of trust lists?

As I mentioned above, I didn't know that my personal trust list was publicly available. To whom & how would you suggest I complain to? I would like to.

I don't think that my personal trust list should be publicly available. Who I trust or don't trust, should be my choice to share. I think the way it should be, is if you want to know trust opinions of a user, send the a PM and ask. Isn't that how it is in real life? For me to know who you trust or don't trust, I'd have actually ask you. I really would need to ask specifically, do you trust DavidT or JohnnyL? (etc) That's exactly what I have to do in real life, is ask. I don't have some way to quietly peer into someone's data and find out.

IMO, on the positive side of this, I would love to see this analysis (if it can be proven out) be an additional tool of proving alts, available to admins or staff only. Not publicly. If they can use the information, to further a review into specific, possible, alt accounts, let them do that, with discretion, using other input as well. Dogie mentioned in the OP, that this may help identify alts and that it should be but one piece of evidence (great wording btw Dogie, and thank you for qualifying the possible limitations of the analysis). It's not an absolute.

As I read that, I read that there is possibly some margin of error or something similar. With that in mind, I don't think the results should be shared publicly, because it is way too easy (and likely here on BCT) for it to turn into a witch hunt, where innocent people will be trampled along with alt abusers.

Dogie, thanks for posting the question. It was your analysis, so it was your question to ask publicly.

My request would be, if this was to be posted publicly, that it only be done, with the blessing of Theymos (in a public post). (it's really his forum, let him decide if something like this should be publicly shared and let him publicly let us know he has approved that).