Here we go again.
If it’s unethical to do it to Harry, it’s unethical to do it to anyone.
In the pantheon of distortions of the Golden Rule–-“Do Unto Others What They Did Unto You;” “Do Unto Others What You Think They Would Do Unto You If You Gave Them The Chance;” “Do Unto Others Before They Do It Unto You,” “Do Unto Other As You Wish They Would Do Unto You Even Though You Deserve A Hell of a Lot Worse,” and many others—perhaps the most popular is “Do Unto Others What They Did Unto Others, or You.” This is the “Tit for Tat” rationalization, the invalid ethical theory that when someone does something wrong, it waives the ethical rule making it wrong if the conduct is applied to them. I discussed this in the post and the thread about the Right’s “Harry Reid is a pederast” meme, devised as retribution for Reid’s admittedly despicable assertion that Mitt Romney was a tax evader, as vivid a modern example of “Big Lie” politics as we are ever likely to see. I don’t want to repeat myself. You can review it here; this was the most viewed post on Ethics Alarms in 2012.
It should suffice to remind blogger Fountain that if he believes the what the New York Journal News did by publishing the names and addresses of all the gun permit holders in two New York counties was wrong—and it was—it is just as wrong for him to publish the names and addresses of the paper’s staff on his blog. In fact, address outing—publishing the phone number or address of someone in a manner that invites harassment, as both these instances do—is always unethical. Please note that while I correctly am pointing out that Fountain’s breach of these individuals’ privacy is wrong, irresponsible and unfair (for example, how does he know that all the staff members were involved in or even aware of the decision to post the permit owners’ addresses?), I am NOT publishing his address on a map, so militant ethicists can come and do God knows what to him.
The madness has to stop somewhere.
Ethics Alarms 
Funny, I got your e-mail and this at the same time.
Sent from my iPad
Janet Hassonwas not only merely aware, she defended it.
Christopher C. Morton first discussed an incident similar to this seven years ago.
Morton did not mention whether the Plain Dealer published the addresses of CCW permit holders. I do not know if Fountain would have gone so far to publish the addresses of those reporters had the newspaper merely published the names and cities of residence (which would have been defensible, as I explained in a comment in the earlier post on this subject.)
I should add that in another Usenet post , Morton mentioned that the Plain Dealer did post the addresses of CCW permit holders.
In the internet community, I’ve heard this called “dox dropping,” dropping someone’s “docs” or documents that say their name and address. It’s pretty much the worst thing you can do.
Remember the 13 year old girl who accused her father of rape and he rotted in prison for nine years until she said she made it up? In the wake of the Spike Lee tweeting the address of what’s-his-name (I forget if Trayvon Martin is the kid or the shooter, and I frankly don’t care), I said something to the order of, “Even what SHE has done is not enough to warrant tweeting her address to have a mob of people tear her apart, or even just wing a hard-boiled egg at her mailbox on the way to work.”
I think this is definitive evidence that there is NO circumstance where this would be appropriate.
I disagree.
She deserves it, just like all sex offenders.
On a related note.
http://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2022/02/16/doxxed-freedom-convoy-donor-forced-to-close-her-restaurant-after-threats-n1559775