3 ms·
I think a reasonable compromise would be a sort of "public-by-default after X number of days, but private if requested so by caller". I understand the utility
by kdmccormick 7y ago
I think a reasonable compromise would be a sort of "public-by-default after X number of days, but private if requested so by caller".
I understand the utility of them being public. On the other hand, I have made 911 calls that I definitely don't want to be publicly available, especially online where voice-recognition tools could be used to find a specific person's calls.
- t34543 7y agoI like this model a lot.
- dkural 7y agoThis would protect people making calls based on racial profiling - "man walking in my neighborhood while black".
- kdmccormick 7y agoProtect them from what? Public shaming by people who look them up in databases? Being racist isn't illegal. I'm inclined to think that this is less important than protecting the calls of people who had mental health emergencies and the like.
- rolltiide 7y ago> Protect them from what? Public shaming by people who look them up in databases? Being racist isn't illegal. Retribution, that was obvious to me. Examples: Physical violence as retribution is illegal, while being kicked off of board seats and other areas of influence isn't. Being 86'd (banned) from private establishments isn't illegal. All is possible.
- ben509 7y agoIt would also protect people making calls that could lead to accusations of racial profiling.
- wongarsu 7y agoI'm fine with that. We want people to feel free to call 911 when they feel threatened. Some people will feel threatened for stupid reasons, and some of those stupid reasons are racist. But it's better to let people call without risk of being shamed and then let the operator decide how to react to a call.