Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati

Blogger:  “This blog is under review due to possible Blogger Terms of Service violations...”

Today, the Cincinnati Black Blog is still offline.  I know Nate had posted addresses and social security numbers, but is it really a violation of Blogger’s Terms of Service to do that?  Should it be?  Regardless of one’s position on this issue, it seems the whole situation at the Cincinnati Black Blog has now raised questions about the limits of free speech.

Some time back, Joy Rolland was passing out my phone number, encouraging people to call me.  And it worked.  People who believed the lies she broadcast on TV and radio called my house.  I looked into Ohio’s telecommunication harassment laws, and contacted Google—since she had phone numbers published there.

Google agreed that she should not have been encouraging people to pester me, and they removed those posts.

But they didn’t take down her whole blog.

I haven’t been to Nate’s site in a few days, so I don’t know if he was encouraging people to harass those whose addresses, phone numbers and social security numbers were online.  And I certainly wouldn’t want my own information posted on a web site like Nate had done to his enemies in the matter of his custody battle.

But how did Nate obtain these details?  Are they a matter of public record?  And if they are, who do we blame here—Nate for posting them, or a system that would allow someone’s social security number to be entered into the public record in the first place?

Thank you for reading (and printing from) The Cincinnati Beacon.