[itishappy]

What's your name and address? (Rhetorical question, please don't answer.) Is that info you'd be comfortable sharing on a public forum? I presume you're not doing anything particularly wrong.

This also assumes that we can all agree on a definition for "innocent."

> what is there to protect?

Their privacy. Some people have strong opinions on 3 letter agencies and poor reading comprehension. Some people are just mean spirited. Best way to prevent dumb stuff from happening is to not create a situation where dumb stuff could happen.

[genewitch]

Licensed ham radio operators give their address every 15 minutes by law. And their full name. Sometimes it's a PO box, but mostly a home address's.

I can't think of anything more public than airwaves.

[some_random]

There are many things you're allowed to disclose about yourself that are considered unacceptable to disclose about others without their consent.

[jagged-chisel]

That regulation is known before one signs up to be a ham. So the disclosure is voluntary.

[verandaguy]

This is a bad take. Plenty of licenses involve essentially exchanging a right for a privilege (in simple terms). People who aren't comfortable with this compromise have the choice to not get a certain type of license (and many don't, HAM radio licenses aren't held by anywhere near a sizeable chunk of the population).

Is the underlying assumption that everyone redacted in that report is a licensed HAM radio user deprived of their right to have a private name and address?

[ajsnigrutin]

Sure, they know what they're doing and they're doing it on purpose.

If you rented out a room (or even a hotel room) to Eric Weiss (mitnicks alias, one of many), do you really want everyone here to see your full name and address?

Or if someone hacked some database of users and used your name/surname to socially engineer someone else.

or worse!