[nstart]

Why is this even part of the discussion. This was a long time ago and we have no objective proof that they are in the business of abusing privacy and trust. I'm all for a good discussion of multiple view points but not via something thats baseless. If he had shown signs of having no regard for privacy in recent times then fine. But he's time and time again spoken of privacy. Leaving all that aside, they are audited by a 3rd party. That cannot and should not be negated by some frivolous use of a person's statement when he was far less mature and handling far less responsibility. Let's not breed unhealthy conversation please.

[Zelphyr]

I think its a perfectly valid part of the discussion. Facebook holds a great deal of power with the kinds of personal data they possess so I don't have a problem whatsoever holding them to the highest standard possible when it comes to private information.

[nstart]

Holding them to the highest standard and having a discussion is fine. Bringing up non applicable points from the past is not ok. The premise being made in that argument was "mark was untrustworthy as a student and therefore he should be treated with suspicion now". That premise is flawed as it has no logical connection to the present. If someone can bring proof that Mark still doesn't care about privacy and is cavalier about it, fine. That point doesn't do that. Therefore, it shouldn't be part of the discussion.