[sovok_x]

Village is a close-knit community where everyone else may easily punish you if you abuse the system of communal knowledge. In a wider world people can abuse it but won't get any consequences at all because of enormous resources needed to monitor for relatively minor things. So the example is quite irrelevant.

[prepend]

I grew up in a village and I think it was worse. Every mistake and misstep was known by all. Prejudices existed before you were born and couldn’t be escaped. “Close knit community” is a nice wa my of saying lots of busybody assholes (and also some kind and caring folks too).

There was a whole different set of pressure and I’d take internet shaming over not being able to live in certain areas or date certain people any day.

[sovok_x]

I empathise with your emotion but that has more to do with how closed groups work, local culture and basic human nature. It's not about abuse of uncontrollable information flow. Try to leak some villager's "public secrets" to "outsiders" while still living in the village and see for yourself what will happen to you.

[prepend]

Interestingly, there was a complex set of layers about what secrets were leakable (“Betsy is a whore when drunk”) vs not (“Joe is a pedarast and don’t let your kids be alone with him.”).

But my point is that villages suck too. I voted with my feet over the problems of a giant crowd of people potentially knowing your business, vs a small group always knowing your business and constantly interfering.

[sovok_x]

And I don't judge the choice. But implying that by switching one problem for another makes either of them not worthy of solving or considering on its own, because the other seems bigger, just feels wrong.