Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:05:23 -0400 To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org> From: "Mike B." <omni at omniphile.com> Subject: [WSFA] Re: Re" Phone Numbers Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org> At 08:39 PM 5/2/05 -0400, Ted White wrote: > >I think you're stretching any parallel between Lexus-Nexus and WSFA past >the breaking point. The WSFA JOURNAL never contained "personal >information" on the level of Lexus-Nexus: no Social Security numbers, for >example. And the addresses and phone numbers are unlikely to be current or >usable. Agreed for the most part. Some addresses and phone numbers may still be current, I have no way to tell without a lot of work to check them all...though you did say yours hadn't changed. Past address info is useful in identity theft though, but there are other places to get it...though usually not so undetectably. The main risks I can see are SPAM and bulk marketers and people who are trying to avoid being found by those who want to do them harm (the estranged ex thing for instance). Since WSFA seems to have no viable privacy policy, current info could be published next, but that is still speculative...and I hope it stays that way. >Further on in your post (not quoted) you refer to the circulation of Don >Miller's 30-years-old WSFA JOURNALs as "very limited" and you seem to think >they were then circulated as they are now (sans the web). In this you are No, I didn't refer specifically or exclusively to Don Miller's editions, which predated my membership. I said 25-30 years ago, meaning approximately the period around when I first joined WSFA (early 80s, more or less for me, but my impression at the time was that things had been done the same way for some time, hence the 30 year limit). The ones I saw were much smaller and as far as I know, just circulated at meetings and perhaps sent to a few more distant members or interested subscribers. If his editions were at 30 years range, then things apparently weren't done the same way for very long before I joined, so perhaps I should have said 20-25 rather than 25-30. >Miller sent copies all over the world. Even so, I doubt there were as many people with access to them as there are with access to the web today, and I suspect his audience was restricted to a better class of people than the web is too. Hence much lower risk of the information getting into the wrong hands. -- Mike B. -- We're lost, but we're making good time.