Threadless offering $1000 for positive ID of Chicagoans in these photos(windycitizen.com)
windycitizen.com
Threadless offering $1000 for positive ID of Chicagoans in these photos
http://www.windycitizen.com/chicago/crime/2009/12/21/threadless-offering-1000-to-anyone-who-can-identify-2-chicago-men-captured-
7 comments
This whole idea is creepy as hell - someone from threadless just says it's "serious" and refuses to give any details as to who these people are or why they want to suddenly play net-nanny. In the meantime, here's a handful of cash for whoever decides to play big brother. It's a bad thing to start, and a bad thing to encourage.
Sorry dudes, we were told by the police that we cannot release any information as to _why_ we want to track these guys down. They said that in situations in the past, people have been sued for defamation.
I really really really wish I could tell you what is going on. For now, you will have to rely on the internet rumormill:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1008900
I really really really wish I could tell you what is going on. For now, you will have to rely on the internet rumormill:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1008900
Couldn't you just say "hey, the police would like to talk to these persons of interest, do you know who they are"? Or something of that nature?
I'm all for trying to find out who the people are if you need to find out, but putting a dollar figure on it just rubs me the wrong way.
Good luck though, I hope you guys find your men.
I'm all for trying to find out who the people are if you need to find out, but putting a dollar figure on it just rubs me the wrong way.
Good luck though, I hope you guys find your men.
Yes, we could have. However time is of the essence here, and we took all of the recommendations you see directly from the Chicago Police Department. They recommended a direct cash incentive would be the quickest and easiest way to find both of these guys.
(Slightly) more info here:
http://chicago.everyblock.com/announcements/by-date/2009/12/...
http://chicago.everyblock.com/announcements/by-date/2009/12/...
This sentiment seems a little silly to me - there's no implicit right to anonymity in RL, especially if you go around pissing people off by stealing from them.
No, there's no legal right to anonymity for these things. But he just said "bad thing to start, bad thing to encourage."
Here, let's try a thought exercise. "I got hit on by this guy at a bar the other night. Let's make it public that he's gay and obviously scum ('cause he hit on me). I'll give $100 for whoever can tell me his name and where to go to tell his neighbors, $50 for the person who told them, and $25 for each of the next people to tell them."
See why it might be a bad idea to encourage this as a general solution to this type of problem?
Don't get me wrong -- it really sucks that Threadless got robbed, and these guys (assuming they were the thieves) deserve to be found and punished.
But as we discover new means of vigilante justice, it's worth remembering that vigilante justice has a cost in fairness, accuracy and rule of law.
Here, let's try a thought exercise. "I got hit on by this guy at a bar the other night. Let's make it public that he's gay and obviously scum ('cause he hit on me). I'll give $100 for whoever can tell me his name and where to go to tell his neighbors, $50 for the person who told them, and $25 for each of the next people to tell them."
See why it might be a bad idea to encourage this as a general solution to this type of problem?
Don't get me wrong -- it really sucks that Threadless got robbed, and these guys (assuming they were the thieves) deserve to be found and punished.
But as we discover new means of vigilante justice, it's worth remembering that vigilante justice has a cost in fairness, accuracy and rule of law.
The value of your thought exercise is that it would flush out bigots.
They aren't asking for vigilante justice. They're asking for identification.
They aren't asking for vigilante justice. They're asking for identification.
[deleted]
> no implicit right to anonymity
Check the privacy laws of the United States - they clearly do protect our right to anonymity: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_laws_of_the_United_Stat...
In this case I see both violations of False Light and Appropriation being possible, if these guys didn't do anything, and didn't agree to be involved in this stunt.
Personally I like the idea of vigilantism, but these things are better left to law enforcement and the legal system. They are in place for a reason, after all.
Check the privacy laws of the United States - they clearly do protect our right to anonymity: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_laws_of_the_United_Stat...
In this case I see both violations of False Light and Appropriation being possible, if these guys didn't do anything, and didn't agree to be involved in this stunt.
Personally I like the idea of vigilantism, but these things are better left to law enforcement and the legal system. They are in place for a reason, after all.
You know that that Wikipedia article doesn't even have the word "anonymity" in it, right?
There's no general privacy law in the U.S. There's some minor right to write anonymously, extrapolated from the First Amendment, but absolutely no right to be anonymous in general, and in fact the First Amendment goes the other way: Threadless has the right to publish those photos and to make any truthful statements about them whatsoever. In many cases Threadless can even make untruthful statements about the photos and still be perfectly legal.
There's no general privacy law in the U.S. There's some minor right to write anonymously, extrapolated from the First Amendment, but absolutely no right to be anonymous in general, and in fact the First Amendment goes the other way: Threadless has the right to publish those photos and to make any truthful statements about them whatsoever. In many cases Threadless can even make untruthful statements about the photos and still be perfectly legal.
Maybe I'm misreading Wikipedia, but it looks like False Light and Approbation violations would require (respectively) the dissemination of false information or some intent to gain financially.
However, it's probably true that these laws will be tested in unexpected ways as everyone gains the power to communicate with "the public".
However, it's probably true that these laws will be tested in unexpected ways as everyone gains the power to communicate with "the public".
[deleted]
Harper (ex-Threadless CTO) just tweeted:
Threadless got robbed again - but there are pictures! $1000 to anyone who can identify these two Chicago jagoffs: http://bit.ly/7C8XHn
http://twitter.com/harper/status/6908083982
Threadless got robbed again - but there are pictures! $1000 to anyone who can identify these two Chicago jagoffs: http://bit.ly/7C8XHn
http://twitter.com/harper/status/6908083982
whoops ;)
I had just finished reading "This is not a game" about crowdsourcing crime solving using ARG techniques. It was a decent read. When i heard that something terrible had happened to the threadless tech dept. It seemed like a great way to possibly find the alleged crooks.
Luckily the dudes who remain at threadless were quick on the execution and had already appealed to the community. They are attempting to use the same method that MIT used to find the red balloons (i.e. a tiered reward for reporting info).
Here is some info from threadless: http://www.threadless.com/news/536659/Identify_these_Christm...
Here is photos from scottv's flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottvdp/sets/72157622921219371...
Luckily the dudes who remain at threadless were quick on the execution and had already appealed to the community. They are attempting to use the same method that MIT used to find the red balloons (i.e. a tiered reward for reporting info).
Here is some info from threadless: http://www.threadless.com/news/536659/Identify_these_Christm...
Here is photos from scottv's flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottvdp/sets/72157622921219371...
Reminds me of the "Human Flesh Search Engines" that form on Chinese BBS's. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_flesh_search_engine
Tell me that's not Jay & Silent Bob in real life. . .
Sorry our servers are struggling today...
I don't like it. I don't like going on a manhunt for no good reason.
Are they ex-employees who must be punished dearly?
Are they thiefs? Alleged thiefs? Being hassled by the company?
Are they ex-employees who must be punished dearly?
Are they thiefs? Alleged thiefs? Being hassled by the company?
I don't like it either. Doing this without any context is creepy and a little un-nerving. People would probably go to some length for $1000.
"scottvdp 33 min 29 sec ago
We cannot say, for legal reasons. I can tell you that if you find them, we will pay you handsomely.
"
My guess is that they're friends of the company who volunteered for this.
Exactly my thought. Are these people on the Threadless hit list or something? And the fact that they avoided the question when someone asked...